While we're waiting . . .

Discussion in '35mm Cameras' started by Eric Miller, Sep 14, 2009.

  1. Eric Miller

    Eric Miller Guest

    for the troll to post his fabulous point-n-shoot hummingbird photos (and to
    have me kicked from my ISP) I thought I'd post a link to an older pic that I
    have been reworking for print purposes.

    <http://www.dyesscreek.com/birds/index.php?display=hummingbirds/hummer_9-11_034_rt16.jpg&non_lr=1>

    I am having some trouble with noise in the background and still have not
    worked that out. When I print it, it is fine, but when I print it at poster
    size (20x30, I want to put it on the back wall of a festival booth) the
    noise really ruins the image. And while I've read that if I had taken this
    with my SD700, using 1/32,000 shutter speed and ISO 100,000 or something
    like that, I wouldn't be having all these noise issues, I used "last
    century's technology," or at least 2003's by taking it with my 10D.
    Incidentally, if you want to see what the ImageMagick'd version before the
    rework, view the low-res image (IM really isn't to blame for the poor
    appearance, it only resized the previous and inferior version for the web).

    Any suggestions for dealing with the noise issues would be appreciated.

    Eric Miller
    www.colibrihotsauce.com
     
    Eric Miller, Sep 14, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Eric Miller

    Eric Miller Guest

    BTW, I was going to entitle this post "Redneck Shows His Behind" but Bret
    does a much better job with subject lines.

    Eric Miller
    www.colibrihotsauce.com
     
    Eric Miller, Sep 14, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Try out a free demo trial of one of the specialised noise reduction
    programs, such as Noise Ninja or Neat Image. I use the latter which
    I've found to be very good.
     
    Chris Malcolm, Sep 14, 2009
    #3
  4. Eric Miller

    Eric Miller Guest

    Honestly because I can't figure it out, or just don't have the time. I
    loaded it onto the memory card in my SD700 and managed to bring up the
    menu, but then realized that I was going to have to go back and find
    some step by step manuals in order to be able to play with stuff that I
    really don't need. Seriously, who needs to be able to play a game on the
    screen on their digital camera? And I generally like playing with stuff
    like that but it is anything but intuitive.

    By contrast, the Canon menu actually makes sense and is related to
    taking pictures which happily coincides with the fact that it is loaded
    on a camera.

    Eric Miller
    www.dyesscreek.com
     
    Eric Miller, Sep 14, 2009
    #4
  5. Eric Miller

    ColinD Guest

    Dark backgrounds, out of focus, show noise mercilessly, especially if
    the shot is somewhat underexposed as I suspect this one was.

    The web shot you posted is too small to really see the problem, but
    imported into PS, taken up to about 250% and then lightened
    (Image/Adjustments/Shadow-Highlight, with shadows at about 50%, there is
    some noise present.

    Running the image through Neat Image smoothed out the background
    considerably, except around the bird's tail, where the image shows signs
    of posterization, indicating underexposure.

    You could use Neat Image or Noise Ninja - I prefer NI - or you could use
    Gaussian Blur in Photoshop to smooth out the background. I used the
    Magic Wand with tolerance at 35 to select the background, then
    Filters/Blur/Gaussian Blur at a radius of about 2 pixels worked quite
    well. These settings may well be different on the full-size image of
    course.

    Bottom line: this is not a good image technically, and the above is a
    rescue operation, so you may have to accept a not quite perfect result.

    Colin D.
     
    ColinD, Sep 15, 2009
    #5
  6. Eric Miller

    Eric Miller Guest

    I have actually been working on it for some time with different methods.
    Most recently I used the gaussian blur technique but had to use a large
    pixel radius because of the larger size of the original image and ended
    up having to use some masks to get rid of the halo on the blurred layer.
    The results are probably acceptable for the print at the anticipated
    viewing distance.

    The exposure on the bird isn't too bad but there is obvious
    underexposure of parts. The worst noise is in the green parts of the
    background and that is very underexposed. It's an older image taken
    before I learned the value of bringing plenty light to the task and
    shooting during midday such as in this photo:

    <http://www.dyesscreek.com/birds/index.php?display=hummingbirds/_MG_3242.jpg&non_lr=1>

    Of course the 5D is considerably more tolerant of underexposure than was
    the 10D. But alas, the underexposure is my fault and, yes, this is a
    rescue mission. I'll give one of the noise reduction programs a try over
    the weekend to see if it helps.

    Eric Miller
    www.dyesscreek.com
     
    Eric Miller, Sep 15, 2009
    #6
  7. Eric Miller

    SMS Guest

    Don't let our favorite troll turn you off on the useful parts of CHDK.
    Yeah, the games are kind of dumb, but the developers were just having
    some fun.

    Some parts of CHDK are quite useful. The histogram, raw mode on the
    models that don't support RAW natively, and stuff like enabling zoom
    mode during video recording.

    Much of CHDK is intuitive and a manual isn't needed, but there is
    adequate documentation for when you do need instruction. If you have any
    specific questions on the operation of CHDK let me know as I have done
    some of the documentation that's on-line and am very familiar with the
    firmware.
     
    SMS, Sep 16, 2009
    #7
  8. Eric Miller

    Noons Guest

    Eric Miller wrote,on my timestamp of 15/09/2009 1:06 AM:
    Is there noise in the bird or just the background?
    Do what the troll does: take a new background with no bird,
    then just cut out the bird from the original, oversharpen
    until it's plain silly, and then paste it as the top layer
    in the new background. And dont forget to edit the EXIF
    to "prove" that none of that happened.
     
    Noons, Sep 16, 2009
    #8
  9. i wonder what's the point of noting this. the above manipulations with
    appropriate values will show "some noise" in each and every digital
    picture ever taken in the history of mankind. (unless, of course it was
    specifically post-processed for noise removal.)
     
    Korben Dallas, Sep 16, 2009
    #9
  10. Eric Miller

    Eric Miller Guest

    Both. But most of the noise in the bird is manageable. It is the
    background noise, primarily in the green areas that is the problem. This
    noise is the wings is somewhere between those to levels of problem.

    Eric Miller
    www.dyesscreek.com
     
    Eric Miller, Sep 17, 2009
    #10
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.