Noise control

[SheriffAds]

Hi all

I am shooting with a Nikon D7000 having stepped up from a D60. I shoot in the manual modes and keep as much eadjustment back for PS Lightroom/CS6 as possible without the camera trying to fix anything itself for example active-D is turned off as is noise control.

What I am finding (probably to the greater resolution) is that I am noticing noise a lot more with the D7000 than I did with the D60. I know the basics of what causes noise and therefore shoot in the lowest ISO possible and try and expose the photo correctly rather than having Photoshop do it later which of course increases noise as well.

I do of course understand how to remove noise using Lightroom or Photoshop but I just wondered if people have any other tips to reduce noise in the image? At the moment I find it a bit hit and miss and fully accept that it is probably me rather than this awesome camera.

[ExPat2B]

Shoot Raw, expose to the right of the histogram, and bring the clipped highlights down in a raw converter. The further right you are, the less noise in the picture.

DXO Mark Optics Pro "Prime" noise reduction is the best, bar none. It does take about 4 mins per picture to process but that is the price you pay for the best optical quality.

[creampuff]

Can you post a sample pic with EXIF still attached of something which you think is too noisy?

[Simpo Two]

Can't think how you get a noisy images with a camera like that at lowest ISO.

Unless you have AutoISO on of course...

[markmullen]

ExPat2B said:

Shoot Raw, expose to the right of the histogram, and bring the clipped highlights down in a raw converter. The further right you are, the less noise in the picture.

Expose to the right by all means but unless you're very sure how far you can push the files from your own camera deliberately clipping highlights and trying to recover them in post is a risky strategy, push them to far and they'll not be recoverable and you'll end up with grim grey highlights.

[SheriffAds]

Hi guys thanks for the replies. I should have said that I shoot RAW and I don't use auto ISO unless I am in "P" mode (rarely) and even then I set a limit.

Doing a bit of reading based on the comments above I think that perhaps I am underexposing in favour of a low ISO but instead perhaps I should boost the ISO and expose correctly instead?

Take this photo for example of the poser known as Joby. With no adjustment when zoomed to 100% there is very clear noise in the background on the roof tiles. Adding a little bit of fill boosts this noise dramatically. This was shot at ISO250, F3.5 @ 1/500

I suppose the question is am I being too picky?

[MysteryLemon]

Embrace the noise.

That images looks perfectly fine to me. If I were you though, try not to underexpose and correct in post as this will bring more noise into the shadows and details. If anything, overexpose a touch and darken in post (exposing to the right) but you need to be very careful not to actually blow the highlights as you wont be able to recover them.

TBH though, technique aside, exposing correctly in the camera is the best thing to do rather than trying to fix everything in post. Even 100iso raw files will become noisy if they need a lot of correction to the exposure.

[2slo]

^ I agree with this advice. If you have time, raise your exposure until the white edge of your histogram shows you just at the limit without blowing the highlights. If your camera is one which generates a lot of noise and you're bothered by this, the degree of over exposure you've dialled in will allow you to reduce the exposure so reducing the noise in pp.

SheriffAds said:

I think that perhaps I am underexposing in favour of a low ISO but instead perhaps I should boost the ISO and expose correctly instead?

Definitely.Use the correct ISO based on the exposure you need, not the other way around. A small amount of noise isn't difficult to fix. There's a recommendation above for DxO optics Pro 9 software. I find that pretty good, although I prefer Topaz denoise which is a plug in for photoshop rather than a stand alone program. Most allow a free trial of some sort before you buy.

[creampuff]

I think the whole pic is about 2/3 stop underexposed. The subject's face would be towards the left hand side of the histogram. Bits of the sky may blow out, but you are not photographing the sky. He would both look better and any noise, which I do not think is there anyway, would be less noticeable with a slightly higher exposure.

[SheriffAds]

Many thanks to everyone who has taken the time to reply - you have all certainly given me plenty to think about and now practice.

I think that I get a bit too focused on not losing any detail in the highlights until I get an exposure that doesn't have any detail blown out. An example might be snapping a dark car with chrome on a nice day... very hard not to blow out the sky or the chrome and have the subject exposed correctly. Thinking allowed I like Creampuff's statement regarding what we are exposing for.

[Simpo Two]

SheriffAds said:

I think that I get a bit too focused on not losing any detail in the highlights until I get an exposure that doesn't have any detail blown out. An example might be snapping a dark car with chrome on a nice day... very hard not to blow out the sky or the chrome and have the subject exposed correctly. Thinking allowed I like Creampuff's statement regarding what we are exposing for.

Agreed. Some subjects simply have too much dynamic range to capture both ends of it. Sun glinting on chrome is a good example of 'specular higlights' - others being sun on water and glasses. Let them go - because they also look brilliant white to the human eye - and concentrate on the subject. You can also process the RAW twice, one for the highlights and one for the shadows, and combine in PS - I do this a lot with wedding photos.

I don't see noise in the above photo but I do see underexposure and a rather blue white balance.

[SheriffAds]

I decided to have a little practice on the weekend as I was at the Speedfest event. I found a suitable black car during the mid day sun and aimed to expose closer to the right as possible. The result is:

Chevrolet Carrera by Sheriff Ads, on Flickr

Probably a little over exposed but I quite like how it came out. I used a polarised filter and have done a little post processing by bumping the shadows slightly, bringing the highlights down and adding some gentle curves and finally a tiny bit of extra clarity. I am pleased with the noise levels although that has now been replaced with the amount of dust/pollen on the car!

[andy-xr]

I have the D7000, you can shoot 2 stops over and still pull back enough detail (I tested it using a red and white tea towel) using Recovery in Lightroom to make it usable without resorting to a black and white.

Are you sure you're seeing noise as noise, and not some lens issue?

One thing I do find with the D7000 is chimping gives false results, the screen brightness cant be turned down low enough on the +/- to get an accurate result against a balanced screen, so that could be fooling you as well - check histogram to be sure

[james_tigerwoods]

I'm at a point now where I am learning more and more about my camera, but one thing I don't quite understand is the Histogram - I don't pay it a huge amount of attention as I don't really understand it and I tend to shoot carefully ensuring I don't have too many darks/lights but I think I'd like to know what it is and how it works.

To that end, can someone give me an idiot guide to what it is and how it can help me please?

(Sorry for the hijack, but it's being discussed already )

Thanks, JTW

[Simpo Two]

james_tigerwoods said:

I'm at a point now where I am learning more and more about my camera, but one thing I don't quite understand is the Histogram - I don't pay it a huge amount of attention as I don't really understand it and I tend to shoot carefully ensuring I don't have too many darks/lights but I think I'd like to know what it is and how it works.

Left hand end represents black, right hand represents white, the rest of the tones are in-between.

The 'curve' represents the photo and its exposure. If it's cut off at the left you will have some solid blacks; if it's cut off at the right you will have some solid whites. You may or may not want that depending on what the photo is of. To change where the curve is on the baseline - ie move it left to right or darker to lighter - increase the exposure, and vice versa.

[SheriffAds]

andy-xr said:

I have the D7000, you can shoot 2 stops over and still pull back enough detail (I tested it using a red and white tea towel) using Recovery in Lightroom to make it usable without resorting to a black and white.

Are you sure you're seeing noise as noise, and not some lens issue?

One thing I do find with the D7000 is chimping gives false results, the screen brightness cant be turned down low enough on the +/- to get an accurate result against a balanced screen, so that could be fooling you as well - check histogram to be sure

Thanks for your reply. I think I am being too pick as Lightroom allows you to zoom in to 100% and I can see a noisy slightly speckled effect in the out of focus and slightly darker areas of my pictures. Of course I have no found that this doesn't show up very well when converting to JPEG to upload to the web as the image is compressed. I think that I need to stop zooming into a small area of the picture and accept that such detail can't be seen on a printed or optimised image.

Good call over the chimping... I have noticed that often the preview looks ok but back on the computer shows that the photo is actually under exposed which certainly doesn't help with the noise issues. I'll make sure to use the histogram instead.

[Simpo Two]

Don't use the monitor to judge exposure, it's one of the first elephant traps you fall into when using a DSLR.