im confused

hayley.price

hayley.price

Messages
1,796
Name
hayley
Edit My Images
Yes
i recently read in a magazine about a photography who always has his iso at 1600 (yes iso i had to re-read it) because he believed that it didn't cause enough noise to ruin the picture and it made sure that all his pictures were as sharp as possible, but still able to be blown up at any size.

now it might just be because i don't have a pro camera i just have the nikon d5100, but even when my iso is at 600 and i put it as the background on my laptop only an 11inch screen, without even croping the picture in closer that the noise is ridiculous and it ruins the picture, now is this just me being a perfectionist or is it because of my camera i use??
 
Noise is negated somewhat during printing, and chances are he has a D3, which would indeed yield results at 1600 unobtainable with your D5100.

Some screens are also a lot worse at showing noise - I have a film shot that has been praised for having no grain - yet when viewed on a monitor at work, it appears as if it was shot on a cameraphone!
 
hayley.price said:
...is this just me being a perfectionist or is it because of my camera i use??
Click to expand...

A little of both. I wouldn't use 1600 on mine either if I had a choice. Pro level cameras and noise reduction software can give useable pics at much higher isos than consumer level cameras. Even iso 800 is pushing it on my Canon 500D (if I'm being picky), 1600 I'd avoid unless I had to.
 
Andy_S said:
A little of both. I wouldn't use 1600 on mine either if I had a choice. Pro level cameras and noise reduction software can give useable pics at much higher isos than consumer level cameras. Even iso 800 is pushing it on my Canon 500D (if I'm being picky), 1600 I'd avoid unless I had to.
Click to expand...

i only put mine up that high when shooting indoor equine events because i have to, as for putting it up to 600 that was to try and increase my shutter speed a bit more for show jumping and of flying birds, as my flying bird shots never look right to me, i can do show jumping just trying to make them better there, if i wasn't so interested in getting a new laptop i would buy a more high level camera but as i Havant even had the d5100 a year yet i cant really justify that yet aha.


Alan Clogwyn said:
Noise is negated somewhat during printing, and chances are he has a D3, which would indeed yield results at 1600 unobtainable with your D5100.

Some screens are also a lot worse at showing noise - I have a film shot that has been praised for having no grain - yet when viewed on a monitor at work, it appears as if it was shot on a cameraphone!
Click to expand...

didn't know screens could make it worse might be my screen as my current laptops a good few years old now
 
The noise on a D5100 shouldn't be ridiculous, as I can shoot at iso640 on my D80 (two generations behind yours) and - conditions permitting - get a reasonably clean image. Windows uses a pretty crude resizing for use as a wallpaper though which probably doesn't help.

It's an odd approach to take, as the high iso will only enable sharpness through maintaining a high shutter speed, and do nothing with regards to focussing on the right spot or having sufficient depth of field.

Another reason I couldn't do it is I like wide apertures, and if it's a nice day, then it's going to overexpose.
 
Wouldn't auto-iso be a better solution? Wouldn't work if he's a manual shooter though.
 
You mentioned indoor equine events, I'm not posting this to be smart be just to show the high ISO capabilities of a pro body. I took this a few weeks ago.

1D IV
ISO 8000
1/500th
f/4

scaled.php
 
admirable said:
You mentioned indoor equine events, I'm not posting this to be smart be just to show the high ISO capabilities of a pro body. I took this a few weeks ago.

1D IV
ISO 8000
1/500th
f/4
Click to expand...

Haha show off :P yea i understand the diffrence in camera bodies from entry level to the pros I just think even my camera should have slightly decent capabiltys
 
Hmmm one thing to bear in mind is if you're underexposed, noise will show up worse - so a little higher ISO can at the end appear to result in a cleaner image, if that makes sense. Awful explanation I know, but it's what I've found to be true!

I think the D5100 should handle ISO about the same as my D90 and I can get clean/noise free (unless pixel peeping in dark areas) at ISO 800 with only the very minimum in noise reduction (camera raw's standard levels, lazy but they seem to work for 99% of things!), 1600 isn't unworkable at all with some noise reduction, looks OK online and should be fine printed. I was terrified of noise though when I started, took a while for me to realise a small amount really doesn't matter.
 
hayley.price said:
for instance

is there food down here? by Hayleyprice photography, on Flickr

iso 640 on here looks fine not much noise at all on my wallpaper looked like an utter mess, on my computer monitor and not my laptop (11inch screen laptop) it also looks really noisy when viewed in general on my laptop looks fine
Click to expand...



Honestly, I can't say for sure but it *looks* like an out of focus/slightly poor image you've oversharpened, when I look at the original image - how much sharpening did you do? Or how did you do it may be as relevant?

The level of noise/pixellation look really doesn't look how I'd expect from 640 at least. I say pixellated as it looks like it is that rather than just noise, but I could be wrong!

The reason it looks better in smaller sizes is you cannot see the noise as well in small pictures typically due to how they compress (basic explanation!).

What lens were you using? Nosiness, doubt it's relevant!
 
littlemonster said:
Honestly, I can't say for sure but it *looks* like an out of focus/slightly poor image you've oversharpened, when I look at the original image - how much sharpening did you do? Or how did you do it may be as relevant?

The level of noise/pixellation look really doesn't look how I'd expect from 640 at least. I say pixellated as it looks like it is that rather than just noise, but I could be wrong!

The reason it looks better in smaller sizes is you cannot see the noise as well in small pictures typically due to how they compress (basic explanation!).

What lens were you using? Nosiness, doubt it's relevant!
Click to expand...


The only editing that was done with this picture was a crop and a slight up in the contrast, no sharping what so ever. And I used a tamron 70-300mm lens
 
HMansfield said:
It's an odd approach to take, as the high iso will only enable sharpness through maintaining a high shutter speed, and do nothing with regards to focussing on the right spot or having sufficient depth of field.Another reason I couldn't do it is I like wide apertures, and if it's a nice day, then it's going to overexpose.
Click to expand...

it will if he uses A priority and keeps an eye on his shutter speed
 
It sounds like the reason he keeps his iso so high* is so that he doesn't have to keep an eye on his shutter speed as it will always be sufficiently high.

If he's in Aperture Priority and has set it so that he's wide open, regardless of whether the camera is calculating 1/20 or 1/200, his depth of field will always remain at it's minimum for that focal length/distance.
 
hayley.price said:
The only editing that was done with this picture was a crop and a slight up in the contrast, no sharping what so ever. And I used a tamron 70-300mm lens
Click to expand...

Looking at the full sized original on Flickr the image does appear to be aggressively sharpened. Very aggressively.

In the areas which are sharp to begin with the true details in the image overwhelm the noise. In the areas which are outside the DOF the image itself doesn't have much detail, but what does remain visible is the noise and this has been emphasised by the sharpening.

Assuming the sharpening is not the work of Flickr there must be something in your workflow that has caused this sharpening. I'm guessing you shot JPEG and it would follow that, since you have not edited further (apart from cropping), that the sharpening settings in your camera are on the lary side. Maybe they are set that way to offset some lens softness, but the problem there is that the sharpening is applied to everything, noise and all.

This 100% crop from your original image shows how in the foreground the detail dominates the noise, but in the OOF background the noise completely overpowers the (non-existent) detail. The solution for one is to back off on the sharpening. You may also find it worth exploring the NR settings within the camera too.

20110316_152207__LR.jpg


As an example of the harm that oversharpening can do, here's one of my images before and after applying a crazy amount of sharpening. The only edit here is the sharpening, and with a good exposure at 200 ISO the noise is insignificant, but just look at what the sharpening does....

20120319_084258_000.jpg




EDIT : Actually, having seen what a wreck the oversharpening has made of my image I'm not even sure that noise is your issue. It's the sharpening.

p.s. Here's how my sample image looks with no edits when resized to a more normal viewing size. Even though a little soft to begin with (slight focus miss) I'm not sure it needs a big whack with the sharpening stick, perhaps a small one....

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-qflSPAMgMObw/T2bzBemD8CI/AAAAAAABdhE/7FlXFK4P9k0/s800/20100522_135002_7860_LR.jpg
 
Last edited:
tdodd said:
Looking at the full sized original on Flickr the image does appear to be aggressively sharpened. Very aggressively.

In the areas which are sharp to begin with the true details in the image overwhelm the noise. In the areas which are outside the DOF the image itself doesn't have much detail, but what does remain visible is the noise and this has been emphasised by the sharpening.

Assuming the sharpening is not the work of Flickr there must be something in your workflow that has caused this sharpening. I'm guessing you shot JPEG and it would follow that, since you have not edited further (apart from cropping), that the sharpening settings in your camera are on the lary side. Maybe they are set that way to offset some lens softness, but the problem there is that the sharpening is applied to everything, noise and all.

This 100% crop from your original image shows how in the foreground the detail dominates the noise, but in the OOF background the noise completely overpowers the (non-existent) detail. The solution for one is to back off on the sharpening. You may also find it worth exploring the NR settings within the camera too.

20110316_152207__LR.jpg


As an example of the harm that oversharpening can do, here's one of my images before and after applying a crazy amount of sharpening. The only edit here is the sharpening, and with a good exposure at 200 ISO the noise is insignificant, but just look at what the sharpening does....

20120319_084258_000.jpg




EDIT : Actually, having seen what a wreck the oversharpening has made of my image I'm not even sure that noise is your issue. It's the sharpening.

p.s. Here's how my sample image looks with no edits when resized to a more normal viewing size. Even though a little soft to begin (slight focus miss) with I'm not sure it needs a big whack with the sharpening stick, perhaps a small one....

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-qflSPAMgMObw/T2bzBemD8CI/AAAAAAABdhE/7FlXFK4P9k0/s800/20100522_135002_7860_LR.jpg
Click to expand...


i see what you mean ill have a look at my camera setting i work in full manual so it could be something i have done to the settings so i will have a look at that thank you for this as im understanding it a bit more (pictures help)


and thank you to everyone else
 
hayley.price said:
i see what you mean ill have a look at my camera setting i work in full manual so it could be something i have done to the settings so i will have a look at that thank you for this as im understanding it a bit more (pictures help)
Click to expand...
Full manual would usually refer to the exposure, with which I don't think there is much of a problem, and certainly not one which would aggravate noise. I don't know what Nikon call it, but with Canon we have a choice of "picture styles" which alters the processing of the image in camera for JPEGs. You can tweak parameters such as sharpening, contrast and saturation to further tailor how the picture looks.

I think there is a Vivid style in Nikon, which can sometimes look a bit over the top, and maybe that has been further tweaked to increase sharpening. I would think the problem will be found in that area of the camera setup.

EDIT : I've just checked your EXIF. You are using Vivid and have sharpening set to 4. I don't know if that is a little or a lot in the Nikon system. I also see you have Active D-Lighting set to Extra High. I doubt that is causing the "noise" effect we've seen, but it appears like there may be a lot of image adjustment taking place there, as "Extra High" sounds like a lot of something or other to me. Maybe it is making adjustments to exposure that could add to the appearance of noise, but honestly I have no idea on that one.

If you shoot to raw instead of (or as well as) JPEG then you can examine the image before masses of processing is applied and decide how it should be processed and tweaked after you've taken the shot. If you do this up front in JPEG then it may already be too late to make the adjustments you would like. Easing off on some of the more lively settings might give you more leeway for enhancement.
 
Last edited:
tdodd said:
Full manual would usually refer to the exposure, with which I don't think there is much of a problem, and certainly not one which would aggravate noise. I don't know what Nikon call it, but with Canon we have a choice of "picture styles" which alters the processing of the image in camera for JPEGs. You can tweak parameters such as sharpening, contrast and saturation to further tailor how the picture looks.

I think there is a Vivid style in Nikon, which can sometimes look a bit over the top, and maybe that has been further tweaked to increase sharpening. I would think the problem will be found in that area of the camera setup.

EDIT : I've just checked your EXIF. You are using Vivid and have sharpening set to 4. I don't know if that is a little or a lot in the Nikon system. I also see you have Active D-Lighting set to Extra High. I doubt that is causing the "noise" effect we've seen, but it appears like there may be a lot of image adjustment taking place there, as "Extra High" sounds like a lot of something or other to me. Maybe it is making adjustments to exposure that could add to the appearance of noise, but honestly I have no idea on that one.

If you shoot to raw instead of (or as well as) JPEG then you can examine the image before masses of processing is applied and decide how it should be processed and tweaked after you've taken the shot. If you do this up front in JPEG then it may already be too late to make the adjustments you would like. Easing off on some of the more lively settings might give you more leeway for enhancement.
Click to expand...


I can't shoot in raw my my laptop doesn't read it but getting a new one soon so will be able too and the reason for the exposure settings is a like to shoot in high shutter speeds, as I do mostly handheld work i also like to keep my aperture where possible not wide open
 
I've always been rather confused by various cameras ability to produce 'fine' images at high ISO settings - generally they are superb in good lighting conditions! Hand holding at 300mm on my 10D, I set the camera to !SO1600 for the pictures in this thread. Printed 10x8's are pin-sharp with no noise - the posted images are via Photobucket which always seems to soften them considerably. My 40D seems to only produce so, so images at high ISO settings in comparison to the 10D. :thinking:

Paul
 
Kind of funny that with the advent of digital people have become obsessive about noise, granted, noise ain't grain but its not to say a particularly noisy image is a ruined image. I shoot with olympus kit and anyone who knows will appreciate that anything over iso400 in low light ain't noise its a racket! with four thirds chips, they are getting better though it has to be said.
However, in my first serious foray with a digital slr a few years ago i made a few mistakes along the way as we all do, one of which was leaving the iso on auto, resulting in particularly noisy images, or as i now call them, happy mistakes lol most are mono as i tend to convert a high percentage of images to it. Through doing so they have taken on an almost grainesqe quality that works quite well, and no longer contain coloured noise sites as the colour data has been removed.
I do love a bit of grain and grit though, so much so that for my final images for the btec course i am currently studying i will be push processing all the images shot on Kodak tri x400 to iso1600, I've run a test roll and the results are glorious!
 
hayley.price said:
..... the reason for the exposure settings is a like to shoot in high shutter speeds, as I do mostly handheld work i also like to keep my aperture where possible not wide open
Click to expand...
I don't think there is an issue with the exposure settings. It's the picture processing settings that are in question - namely Vivid picture, sharpness = 4 and D-Lighting = extra high.

If you have the opportunity to try some test shots try dialing those parameters back to more modest levels. I don't know what the Nikon equivalent of a "standard" picture is, but try something less lively than "Vivid" for starters and experiment from there.
 
gad-westy said:
Indeed. It is perhaps the best way to use Auto ISO. Works superbly.
Click to expand...

This always caused me some confusion as to why it's a benefit in manual. If i want to reduce the exposure in manual by increasing the shutter speed by 2 stops, wouldn't the auto iso kick in nullifying my exposure settings?
Would adding negative exposure compensation work with auto iso in manual?

I can see the benefits if you want a fixed shutter speed / aperture combination and allow the camera to meter by using the iso.

EDIT
Just had a play with my d300s, and using autoiso in manual does allow for exposure compensation to be dialled in. never knew that!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
hayley.price said:
I can't shoot in raw my my laptop doesn't read it but getting a new one soon so will be able too and the reason for the exposure settings is a like to shoot in high shutter speeds, as I do mostly handheld work i also like to keep my aperture where possible not wide open
Click to expand...

Have you not installed all the software that comes with the camera?

It would certainly have come with a raw editor or at the very least a raw converter. I thought they all came with ViewNX 2? If not just download it for free from their web site.

Ok, here you go!

https://nikoneurope-en.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/51360
 
Last edited:
just to clarify Nikon D5100 does NOT allow auto iso in full manual i just checked as i have my camera in front of me

yes i have the editing software no disk drive but i am saving up for a macbook pro shouldn't take too look as once i get that i will install all the software i need as my currently laptop hasn't got a fast enough processor to run all the programs i want
 
The download doesn't need a disc drive...
 
hayley.price said:
just to clarify Nikon D5100 does NOT allow auto iso in full manual i just checked as i have my camera in front of me
Click to expand...

Are you sure because my d5000 does.
 
if you cannot run ViewNX2 you can always try fsviewer free for home use and supports raw from lots of format, runs nikon 12bit raw from my D5000 no problem, and doesn't need installing, I just have in on a memory stick.
Runs on XP no probs.
 
Rapscallion said:
This always caused me some confusion as to why it's a benefit in manual. If i want to reduce the exposure in manual by increasing the shutter speed by 2 stops, wouldn't the auto iso kick in nullifying my exposure settings?
Would adding negative exposure compensation work with auto iso in manual?

I can see the benefits if you want a fixed shutter speed / aperture combination and allow the camera to meter by using the iso.

EDIT
Just had a play with my d300s, and using autoiso in manual does allow for exposure compensation to be dialled in. never knew that!
Click to expand...

Good isn't it! :)

My only gripe is that there are times when you want full control so that you know your exposure is locked. So you want to quickly flick from auto ISO and back again. I don't see why auto ISO can't be selected with the ISO selector just like auto white balance is selected.
 
gad-westy said:
I don't see why auto ISO can't be selected with the ISO selector just like auto white balance is selected.
Click to expand...

Why oh why can we not do this! Puzzled me when i had my D80, and 6 years later we still can't.
 
hayley.price said:
The only editing that was done with this picture was a crop and a slight up in the contrast, no sharping what so ever. And I used a tamron 70-300mm lens
Click to expand...

You've hopefully got to the bottom of it, but I have top say, even from the postage size shot on my screen, my instant reaction was over-sharpened. It's such an obvious look, and if you can't see that on your screen you definitely need to get something else to edit your pics. You'll never be able to produce quality digital photos if you're processing on a dodgy monitor.
 
Phil V said:
You've hopefully got to the bottom of it, but I have top say, even from the postage size shot on my screen, my instant reaction was over-sharpened. It's such an obvious look, and if you can't see that on your screen you definitely need to get something else to edit your pics. You'll never be able to produce quality digital photos if you're processing on a dodgy monitor.
Click to expand...

Yea I have now decided to save up and get a macbook pro might take a while but I will do it
 
hayley.price said:
Positive mine does not allow auto ISO in manual
Click to expand...

Weird, on Ken Rockwells site he says:

Firmware Defect: Nikon's firmware leaves Auto ISO active even in manual exposure mode. This makes the D5100 change the ISO automatically and defeat the purpose of manual exposure. Remember to deactivate Auto ISO when using Manual exposure mode.

I love how he describes this as a defect where as I think of it as one of my camera's best features!
 
gad-westy said:
Weird, on Ken Rockwells site he says:

Firmware Defect: Nikon's firmware leaves Auto ISO active even in manual exposure mode. This makes the D5100 change the ISO automatically and defeat the purpose of manual exposure. Remember to deactivate Auto ISO when using Manual exposure mode.

I love how he describes this as a defect where as I think of it as one of my camera's best features!
Click to expand...



well i have been using full manual mode of my camera for the last 3 mounths with no auto iso, i would seriusly love to use auto iso in manual but the only auto it allows in full manual is the white blance and the focus
 
Rapscallion said:
This always caused me some confusion as to why it's a benefit in manual. If i want to reduce the exposure in manual by increasing the shutter speed by 2 stops, wouldn't the auto iso kick in nullifying my exposure settings?
Click to expand...
Because people don't use manual purely to control their exposure. You might want to control your shutter speed and aperture, letting the meter decide your iso for you (it's mostly for use in low light situations).
hayley.price said:
Yea I have now decided to save up and get a macbook pro might take a while but I will do it
Click to expand...
Nice as Macbooks are, I think they're really for those with money to spare. If you're having to save up that much, maybe a nice laptop would be better for you. You can get some very nice and fast laptops for very reasonable money.

hayley.price said:
Positive mine does not allow auto ISO in manual
Click to expand...
hayley.price said:
well i have been using full manual mode of my camera for the last 3 mounths with no auto iso, i would seriusly love to use auto iso in manual but the only auto it allows in full manual is the white blance and the focus
Click to expand...
Is auto iso working in aperture or speed mode? To switch it on, go to the shooting menu, iso sensitivity settings, and set auto control on.

So you're saying it works in Aperture mode, then when you switch to manual mode it stops working?
 
HMansfield said:
It sounds like the reason he keeps his iso so high* is so that he doesn't have to keep an eye on his shutter speed as it will always be sufficiently high.

If he's in Aperture Priority and has set it so that he's wide open, regardless of whether the camera is calculating 1/20 or 1/200, his depth of field will always remain at it's minimum for that focal length/distance.
Click to expand...

must hve missed the bit where it says he's shooting wide open ,,hang on just have another look ...nope still cant find it ,,,,

my point being he maybe dosent have to shoot wide open at iso 1600
 
Waste of money buying a Macbook.Buy a Nikon d7000 and down load fastStone.Then you will have solved the noise problem you started this thread about. If you buy a Macbook you may well be starting a new thread about how to solve the horrible glossy reflective screen on your Macbook.:shake:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top