| Author |
Message |
rinder99
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 39182
Location: Contact www.rinderart.com/Books and Workshops www.rindersmithphotography.com Youtube/rinder
|
Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 6:12 pm
|  |
| davidcrehner wrote: | | "Noise is a thing of the past" and is "user error" is misleading, and you know it Laurin. |
if I believed that , I would say so dave.Noise as we "Knew it" is a thing of the past. All Dig Cameras have noise.The degree of noise is user related. Argue all ya want. Don't care.And Pls don't tell me what I know.Disagree? Fine but don't go there. Dave. |
|
rinder99
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 39182
Location: Contact www.rinderart.com/Books and Workshops www.rindersmithphotography.com Youtube/rinder
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 6:41 pm
| |
| davidcrehner wrote: | "Noise is a thing of the past," "noise is user error," and "D3 is noiseless at ISO 6400" are all misleading, and you know it Laurin. Unless by "user error" you meant "took your ISO off 100", and by "D3 is noiseless at ISO 6400" you meant "doesn't look so terribly, horribly awful.
But then, I guess those statements don't win you workshop clientele, huh? ;-)
Whatever. You've never come clean before, so why would I expect you to do so now? |
Ya your right. I know nothing, been Nowhere, people learn absolutely Nothing from me. It's all a big Game and I live to Rip people off because I have no talent or future and Im broke.I don't help anyone and never did, Don't answer 20 PM's a day and take calls from around the world everyday. Your right. And I only picked up my first camera a week before I joined here. Feel Better?LOL. have fun Dave.
No reason to attack , These are just my Opinions about noise. Disagree all ya want.Thats what makes it interesting.
But the second you get personal. it's over. |
|
springhull
Joined: 24 Oct 2006
Posts: 41
Location: Australia
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 6:47 pm
| |
I actually think what I get rejected for background noise is not noise at all.
If you are using f2.0 stands to reason that the blurred background would appear as some type of artifact.
I get a little tired of viewing the thing at 100% and finding no noise, only to find out others are reviewing at 200% |
|
davidcrehner
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
Posts: 4839
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 8:25 pm
| |
| rinder99 wrote: | | But the second you get personal. it's over. |
You mean like this...
| rinder99 wrote: | | Maybe not your truth with your vast experience and tech Mind |
| rinder99 wrote: | | Ya your right. I know nothing, been Nowhere, people learn absolutely Nothing from me. It's all a big Game and I live to Rip people off because I have no talent or future and Im broke.I don't help anyone and never did, Don't answer 20 PM's a day and take calls from around the world everyday. Your right. And I only picked up my first camera a week before I joined here. Feel Better?LOL. have fun Dave. |
Ummm... ooookay? Because that's totally what I said about you?? Don't think so... look, all I'm saying is what I've always said. Some of the things you say, when read at face value by someone new to digital, can really be misleading. Like saying that digital noise is user error. Or that ISO 6400 is noiseless.
Do me a favour. Just one last one, Laurin. Go back and read my original reply to this thread. Did I say anything not true about noise and digital cameras? I'm pretty sure I gave a very good description of what noise is and how to try and avoid it. Then you posted saying essentially "noise is a thing of the past, you should never have to deal with it, it's your own fault if it's there, I shoot ISO 6400 noiselessly." I mean, c'mon. Which of those two posts does a better service to the newbies here? And then when I call you on it, it's all "I'm doing this for the greater good"?
Are you serious?
You know, the more I think about it... you say your camera is "glued on ISO 100". It could be that you really don't deal with noise these days because "for your work" all you need is ISO 100. Well, some of us are living dangerously at ISO 200+. :-) And I think I've got a pretty good handle on noise, how to avoid it when possible, and how to work around it when not. In fact, is it possible I have more experience in this respect than you??? If your camera really is glued to ISO 100 (as you said), maybe???
Who knows, Laurin. |
|
davidcrehner
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
Posts: 4839
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 8:28 pm
| |
Look, can we at least agree on this, as the best noise-related advice for newbies??
| davidcrehner wrote: | | The best way to avoid noise is to LIGHT THE SCENE properly, choose the lowest ISO, and get the fastest shutter speed you can manage. |
|
|
ajperry
Joined: 12 Mar 2008
Posts: 8
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 9:21 pm
| |
| fodagrafer wrote: | I am using a not-dirt-cheap camera with great megapixels, nice optical zoom and a pretty large radius lense. How do I get it to not make noisy photos? What do you do?
Thanks |
Let's face it, "noise happens" no matter how expensive a camera one uses or how diligent one might otherwise be in preparation for that 'perfect' exposure.
Plenty of intellectually valid advice has been given so far and if you have the ability to wade through and digest all of the technical reasons which can cause noise in the first place, then your next step might be to just retire to a quiet place and try to sort out all the things you or your equipment are obviously doing wrong!
On the other hand if you're anything at all like me. which is to say, one who's not given to more than a few brief moments of intense study about technically challenging issues, then perhaps your answer simply lies in the judicial use of a good "noise reduction" filter.
One I like the most is called: GREYCstoration which is a free noise reduction plug-in for an open source freeware image editing program called GIMP2.6 - In some ways, this program exceeds Photoshop and also has the ability to be "re-written" for anyone who has skills in writing computer language. Since I don't, I use the program just the way it is. |
|
rinder99
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 39182
Location: Contact www.rinderart.com/Books and Workshops www.rindersmithphotography.com Youtube/rinder
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 9:36 pm
| |
Agree.and that would be exposure. |
|
miriamcareaga
Joined: 13 Nov 2007
Posts: 2
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 9:39 pm
| |
What about noise and the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ50? Anybody with experience? Did anyone get pics taken with this camera accepted for SS? |
|
cyberscope
Joined: 27 Aug 2008
Posts: 1
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 10:09 pm
| |
I would just buy a flash and/or use a faster lens. There are many times where you can shoot with low ISO outside if you use those outdoor resources by timing the daylight. Mini product-like shots can be contained using a few desktop halogens too. |
|
davidcrehner
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
Posts: 4839
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 10:20 pm
| |
| rinder99 wrote: | | Agree.and that would be exposure. |
Well, I guess everything is exposure.
Noise is all about ISO, and insofar as ISO is part of exposure then sure, it's all about exposure. |
|
miriamcareaga
Joined: 13 Nov 2007
Posts: 2
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 11:36 pm
| |
I never ever go over 80 ISO... I use a tripod whenever the light is insufficient for ISO 80. Still, sometimes I do encounter noise problems. Maybe just a thing of too sharp an eye-sight when checking every pic out at 100 pct. Anyone got experience with this camera and its noise issue? |
|
bucky
Joined: 16 Mar 2007
Posts: 126
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 11:55 pm
| |
Lower iso = lower noise .
Incorrect exposure at any iso = noise.
So proper exposure at lower iso is the answer for little to no noise.
For wildlife I use 400 iso a lot and I do not get rejections for noise, because I expose properly, if my exposure was out by even half a stop I would have noise issues.
Sensor overheating, ambient temperature heat etc etc all play a role in generating extra noise also, but the main culprit is poor exposure. |
|
rinder99
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 39182
Location: Contact www.rinderart.com/Books and Workshops www.rindersmithphotography.com Youtube/rinder
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2008 12:09 am
| |
| hospitalera wrote: | | rinder99 wrote: | | ... my D3 is noiseless and acceptable at 6400 ISO... |
Not everybody can afford a D3, SY |
No sy. Not everyone can. I Can. I have a yearly budget of $12,000 to spend on new or improved equipment either studio or cameras, Last year I went over budget and got the D3. It was a Mistake and I've said so.In my opinion The D2x I sold was a better camera. I 've been with nikon since the NikonF in the late 60's. I switched from leica. I still use my hassy 501CM. let me make this very clear, NONE of the cameras I've bought have made me a better shooter!!!!!!!! None. Some have made it easier, Some harder.
Because I can afford this stuff means nothing. A camera is a light proof box and a piece of glass. The glass is the Important thing. Does a carpenter build something better with a new hammer? NO, A new hammer just makes it easier.Thats what we have now. Tools that make it easier. That Does NOT and WILL NOT make you a better photographer or carpenter.
It has always been and hopefully will always be about your eye. My Yearly expenses are due in January and If the new Canon 5DMk2 is what they say it is. I will switch after I take it home and test it. I have no allegiance to any company. I want the best and I can afford it.$30,000 in nikon gear is history in a heartbeat if the canon is better. Im a total Camera Junkie. I Live it and breathe it 24/7.And it comes right off my taxes.I LOVE cameras, I really do. I touch them, I play with them, I take them apart and put them back together. It's an obsession.Thank god my wife Understands.if not, I wouldn't be married. |
|
davidcrehner
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
Posts: 4839
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2008 6:54 am
| |
| rinder99 wrote: | | If the new Canon 5DMk2 is what they say it is. I will switch after I take it home and test it. |
If you switch, and post a photo of you with all your new Canon gear, I will post a picture of me eating my hat. :-) |
|
mpemberton
Joined: 11 Apr 2005
Posts: 749
Location: Victoria, BC
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2008 10:15 pm
| |
I think the noise arguments have really taken away from the art of photograhy.
I cannot imagine the number of beautiful images that have been deleted.
I scan all the best magazines I can find on fashion and other related items. All the photographers that shoot for those magazines have noise etc.
I believe this is the difference between professional and hobbiest. A hobbiest will say, "oh! There is noise!" Toss. The professional says "oh! cool!!", makes it part of the images mood, puts it in magazine.
PS. Noise is caused by taking a picture with a digital camera and having someone say it is a bad picture with their lice like criteria. |
|
| |
|
Log in
