Advice on editing night shots

T

Tjm2986

Messages
97
Name
Terry
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all took these photos walking to the tram stop after work. I used adobe lightroom to edit them and brigthen them up a little bit so you can see the clouds better. However lightening the clouds has also introduced quite a bit of noise. Any advice on how to counteract this please? I am still a newbie when it comes to editing. I only started shooting in RAW a few weeks ago. Thanks

flic.kr

Nottingham at Night

Explore this photo album by Terry Mullins on Flickr!
flic.kr flic.kr
 
The ISO you use is far too high 1600! you should be using as low ISO as you can and a tripod.
 
Bear in mind you have a tiny sensor on that camera so at ISO 1600 it will be quite noisy in the shadows naturally, personally I wouldn't worry about trying to lift the clouds as they just detract from what are otherwise nice images.
 
The clouds are not adding anything, if anything they are distracting.

I would not brighten the sky and I would not worry about noise in such a shot.
 
imattersuk said:
Why would he want to use a tripod with a small travel camera ? These are clearly street shots so will always be handheld.
Click to expand...

Because if he use low ISO he will have to increase the exposure so he will get camera shake if he does not use a tripod.

If he does not use a tripod he will have noise in the clouds.

Thousands of people take street shots on a night and use a tripod with or without a small camera!

Does that explain it for you.

You might want to consider letting him speak for himself or suggest a solution to his question.
 
shapeshifter said:
Because if he use low ISO he will have to increase the exposure so he will get camera shake if he does not use a tripod.

If he does not use a tripod he will have noise in the clouds.

Thousands of people take street shots on a night and use a tripod with or without a small camera!

Does that explain it for you.

You might want to consider letting him speak for himself or suggest a solution to his question.
Click to expand...
Calm down billy big balls, I do a LOT of street photography and it's rare to see someone using a tripod. I did offer a solution, leave the clouds alone as the LX100 has limitations.

Your reply to the OP was neither helpful or friendly, the use of ! suggests a rude abrupt shouty person, almost ridiculing.
 
Last edited:
imattersuk said:
Calm down billy big balls, I do a LOT of street photography and it's rare to see someone using a tripod. I did offer a solution, leave the clouds alone as the LX100 has limitations.

Your reply to the OP was neither helpful or friendly, the use of ! suggests a rude abrupt shouty person, almost ridiculing.
Click to expand...
You are assuming things, it's best to get the facts. You don't know at all why he uses a small camera. Get the facts. Then you can post knowing what you are talking about. Also it's best to keep your opinions to yourself.

The OP can decide on the nature of my post's.
 
shapeshifter said:
You are assuming things, it's best to get the facts. You don't know at all why he uses a small camera. Get the facts. Then you can post knowing what you are talking about. Also it's best to keep your opinions to yourself.

The OP can decide on the nature of my post's.
Click to expand...
He said "took these photos walking to the tram stop after work" hardly going to have a tripod on him is he you old fool. People carry small cameras for exactly this kind of reason, it's not an assumption he clearly stated when and how he took the shots. You seem to have a history of posting rude responses, have a nice evening Victor Meldrew.
 
Wow. Don't argue guys. To be honest I forgot I had the ISO set to auto and had it limited to 1600 so the camera just maxed itself out. I did wonder why it had a relatively high shutter speed. As has been said I didn't use a tripod because I had just finished work (bus driver) and I carry the LX100 around with me. The high ISO is what has caused the noise on the clouds after I brightened them up. Thankfully I have kept the Raw copies unedited so will tone the clouds back down again.
 
imattersuk said:
Terry you might find this thread on dpreview useful

LX100 low light set up/exposure triangle: Panasonic Compact Camera Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

Expert news, reviews and videos of the latest digital cameras, lenses, accessories, and phones. Get answers to your questions in our photography forums.
www.dpreview.com www.dpreview.com
Click to expand...

Thanks for this. I was using the camera in aperture priority mode. I think I'll take the same photo again tomorrow night and this time try using the manual mode. And then try what the poster suggested and put the Aperture ring to A see if I can get a better result.
 
imattersuk said:
Why would he want to use a tripod with a small travel camera ? These are clearly street shots so will always be handheld.
Click to expand...

Because it will make a better image, and solve the problem the OP asked about.
The solution is definitely in the initial techniques and equipment. NOT in the editing.

Of course if you want to just take really basic snapshots, then argue they are 'street shots' and using that as an excuse without trying to improve then thats up to you.

p.s. for a shot like this I'll always use a tripod
 
riddell said:
Because it will make a better image, and solve the problem the OP asked about.
The solution is definitely in the initial techniques and equipment. NOT in the editing.

Of course if you want to just take really basic snapshots, then argue they are 'street shots' and using that as an excuse without trying to improve then thats up to you.

p.s. for a shot like this I'll always use a tripod
Click to expand...

So we carry a small camera and a tripod? Doesn't that defeat some of the bulk and weight savings we make by going for the small camera.
 
Snapper67 said:
Running this one through Topaz Denoise has helped.

Dougie.
Click to expand...

I opened them as raws in CS5 (just because I like the raw tools) and just did basic processing including some noise reduction and even the ISO 1600 pictures are imo perfectly ok. Not for pixel peeping at 100% and nit picking but other than that perfectly ok. I think the biggest issue isn't actually noise but that blue glow around the pillars and dome on the top.
 
woof woof said:
I opened them as raws in CS5 (just because I like the raw tools) and just did basic processing including some noise reduction and even the ISO 1600 pictures are imo perfectly ok. Not for pixel peeping at 100% and nit picking but other than that perfectly ok. I think the biggest issue isn't actually noise but that blue glow around the pillars and dome on the top.
Click to expand...
Is that an issue with white balance?
 
Last edited:
I think I'll invest in a small tripod that fits in my work backpack. Have to remember I work as a bus driver and carry all my stuff with me and it needs to be able to fit in a very small bus cab :p I'd love to carry my full size tripod around with me at work but its a tad impractical when I am at work.
 
riddell said:
You need to work out what you want to compromise on. Weight or image quality.
Click to expand...

As has already been said, the op took these shots on the way home after finishing work as a bus driver.

The fact is that you can't always have a tripod with you and even if you do there are places and situations in which their use is not really practical. When faced with the question of of taking a tripod with us to work or not or not many of us may just have a "Get Real" moment and stop ourselves. Maybe that even happens to you too at times :D
 
Last edited:
tikkathreebarrel said:
Love following this thread for insights. And insults.
Click to expand...

Some insist on the standard replies such as "should have used a tripod" but in reality we're not always faced with idea situations and opportunities and people who insist on posting in this way are often serial offenders with little helpful to add.
 
woof woof said:
people who insist on posting in this way are often serial offenders with little helpful to add.
Click to expand...
I don't think that's a fair assessment. Even people whose postings I disagree with can make useful points or reinforce the points made by others.
 
woof woof said:
Some insist on the standard replies such as "should have used a tripod" but in reality we're not always faced with idea situations and opportunities and people who insist on posting in this way are often serial offenders with little helpful to add.
Click to expand...

Actually the 'use a tripod' advice is very apt. The serial offenders with little helpful to add are the kind of 'photographers' who just use any excuse to avoid anything other than the easy life.

Using an excuse like he was on his way home from work is not acceptable. If you want a snap, you've got it. Fine, countless people take those with their phone and little pocket cameras all the time, just don't expect anything better than a snap unless you make the effort and take your time.

If you want to take a really great shot, then you need to go the extra mile, make the extra effort and that means going out specifically for the shoot, with all the right equipment and the skill set behind it.
 
Its pretty crazy how this has turned into a full blown insult and argument thread. I merely asked how to stop the noise in the photo when I brightened it up. I was given an answer (ISO too high) I went back out on the way home from work last night. Tried it with a lower ISO and full manual aperture and shutter controls. Tweaked the exposure slighty in camera +1 in this case and I got a better result. Yes I am a massive beginner when it comes to this and I work 6 days a week so I don't always get to go out on shoots so I have to make do.
 
Tjm2986 said:
Its pretty crazy how this has turned into a full blown insult and argument thread. I merely asked how to stop the noise in the photo when I brightened it up. I was given an answer (ISO too high) I went back out on the way home from work last night. Tried it with a lower ISO and full manual aperture and shutter controls. Tweaked the exposure slighty in camera +1 in this case and I got a better result.
Click to expand...

Yeah its frustrating. Unfortunately the internet is an awful place sometimes where the uneducated can put forward their wrong information as fact.

To answer your question a bit more usefully, what you need to do is learn a bit more about the fundamental basics of photography.
When it comes to shooting you need to balance 3 things, aperture, shutter speed and ISO in order to get the correct exposure.
And you NEVER want to adjust brightness etc. beyond minor adjustments in post, because one way or another it will look crap.

Now when it comes to low light shots its going to be difficult even with the best camera / lens to be able to go with the settings you really want, so you have to compromise.

Now if you up the ISO, as you've already found out, its going to get noisier, you can only improve this by spending a lot of money on a much better camera and even then it will never be perfect.
Or you can compromise on opening the aperture right up, this will let in more light at the expense of depth of field, or potentially can be improved by buying a much better, more expensive lens, but you'll still have the same problem with depth of field.

Now personally when it comes to architecture / landscapes, I'm not prepared to compromise on either of the above, because I want top quality images as ISO100 and everything in focus, so I'm often shooting f14 or smaller.

So this now leaves you the final compromise which is shutter speed, but when it gets too long you'll not be able to handhold it without getting blurry, so thats when a tripod comes in.

If you want to think of it that way, the tripod is then my compromise, because I need the tripod because the shutter speed is so long.

Now with the fundamental basics of photography out the way, you then have the following techniques at your disposal -

Use flash other lights, but with a scene like this its unlikely to be practical.

You could use 'light painting' but again it really needs to be on a tripod for this to work. Whilst it has its specialist use, I wouldn't consider it that practical.

Or you could bracket and merge, but again you need a tripod for any degree of success.

And the final option its to tweak in post afterwards, but as you've found out if you do it too much, its not very successful. Its also very time consuming and I consider relying on this method the most amateur of all the options.

And of course you can combine a little bit of all of the above techniques and tweak as required.
 
Tjm2986 said:
Its pretty crazy how this has turned into a full blown insult and argument thread. I merely asked how to stop the noise in the photo when I brightened it up. I was given an answer (ISO too high) I went back out on the way home from work last night. Tried it with a lower ISO and full manual aperture and shutter controls. Tweaked the exposure slighty in camera +1 in this case and I got a better result. Yes I am a massive beginner when it comes to this and I work 6 days a week so I don't always get to go out on shoots so I have to make do.
Click to expand...
Photographers seem to get like that, though I'm not really sure why.

Something that may help with choosing whose advice to take is to see what kind of pictures they produce. I've seen some excellent night images on TP, but not from everyone posting in this thread.
 
Some denim (any tough material will do - I suggested denim because there might be a dead pair of jeans in the bottom of a drawer and a leg is perfect!), a short 1/4" UNC machine screw, 2 penny washers and a nut and some suitable filling and you can make a small bean bag that will screw into the bottom of almost any camera. Works when sat on a table etc. or pressed against a vertical object (wall, lamp post etc.). Or buy a "pod".
 
Tjm2986 said:
I think I'll invest in a small tripod that fits in my work backpack. Have to remember I work as a bus driver and carry all my stuff with me and it needs to be able to fit in a very small bus cab :p I'd love to carry my full size tripod around with me at work but its a tad impractical when I am at work.
Click to expand...
You don't really need a tripod or anything else; what you need is to not be hand holding the camera when the SS is too slow. There's been many times where I simply set the camera on something like the ground, table, rolled up jacket... or a backpack ;).
That said, in my Nikon 1 kit I carry one of these mini tripod/clamp things... it can clamp onto railings/posts/seat backs/etc, or use it as a mini tripod... I see them being sold for a lot more money some places and they are not worth that; but at this price they are worth having/carrying along.
 
Nod said:
Some denim (any tough material will do - I suggested denim because there might be a dead pair of jeans in the bottom of a drawer and a leg is perfect!), a short 1/4" UNC machine screw, 2 penny washers and a nut and some suitable filling and you can make a small bean bag that will screw into the bottom of almost any camera. Works when sat on a table etc. or pressed against a vertical object (wall, lamp post etc.). Or buy a "pod".
Click to expand...
I'm gonna get a tiny vlog style tripod just to keep the camera steady on.
 
riddell said:
Yeah its frustrating. Unfortunately the internet is an awful place sometimes where the uneducated can put forward their wrong information as fact.

To answer your question a bit more usefully, what you need to do is learn a bit more about the fundamental basics of photography.
When it comes to shooting you need to balance 3 things, aperture, shutter speed and ISO in order to get the correct exposure.
And you NEVER want to adjust brightness etc. beyond minor adjustments in post, because one way or another it will look crap.

Now when it comes to low light shots its going to be difficult even with the best camera / lens to be able to go with the settings you really want, so you have to compromise.

Now if you up the ISO, as you've already found out, its going to get noisier, you can only improve this by spending a lot of money on a much better camera and even then it will never be perfect.
Or you can compromise on opening the aperture right up, this will let in more light at the expense of depth of field, or potentially can be improved by buying a much better, more expensive lens, but you'll still have the same problem with depth of field.

Now personally when it comes to architecture / landscapes, I'm not prepared to compromise on either of the above, because I want top quality images as ISO100 and everything in focus, so I'm often shooting f14 or smaller.

So this now leaves you the final compromise which is shutter speed, but when it gets too long you'll not be able to handhold it without getting blurry, so thats when a tripod comes in.

If you want to think of it that way, the tripod is then my compromise, because I need the tripod because the shutter speed is so long.

Now with the fundamental basics of photography out the way, you then have the following techniques at your disposal -

Use flash other lights, but with a scene like this its unlikely to be practical.

You could use 'light painting' but again it really needs to be on a tripod for this to work. Whilst it has its specialist use, I wouldn't consider it that practical.

Or you could bracket and merge, but again you need a tripod for any degree of success.

And the final option its to tweak in post afterwards, but as you've found out if you do it too much, its not very successful. Its also very time consuming and I consider relying on this method the most amateur of all the options.

And of course you can combine a little bit of all of the above techniques and tweak as required.
Click to expand...
Thank you so much for this. I will try the method suggested I'm going to get a tiny tripod that will fit in my work bag. The only issue I may have with such a slow shutter speed is that Nottingham city centre is never completely free of other people so I might end up with blurred halos of people walking around. Obviously that is merely a trivial problem and I'd have to try and grab shots when there's a gap.
 
If you can get several shots from the same point, you should be able to stack/merge them and remove any unwanted people. Or, a sufficiently long exposure might reduce them to unnoticeable blurs (note the MIGHT!). TBH, people are a fact of life and a shot with nobody in it can look too sterile.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top