D200 ISO 1600 in lowlight conditions.

Got a thin skin? Then look elsewhere. Post a link to an image that you've made, and invite others to offer their critiques. Honesty is encouraged, but please be positive in your constructive criticism. Flaming and just plain nastiness will not be tolerated. Please note that this is not an area for you to showcase your images, nor is this a place for you to show-off where you have been. This is an area for you to post images so that you may share with us a technique that you have mastered, or are trying to master. Typically, no more than about four images should be posted in any one post or thread, and the maximum size of any side of any image should not exceed 950 px.

Moderators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators

Forum rules
Please note that image critiquing is a matter of give and take: if you post images for critique, and you then expect to receive criticism, then it is also reasonable, fair and appropriate that, in return, you post your critique of the images of other members here as a matter of courtesy. So please do offer your critique of the images of others; your opinion is important, and will help everyone here enjoy their visit to far greater extent.

Also please note that, unless you state something to the contrary, other members might attempt to repost your image with their own post processing applied. We see this as an acceptable form of critique, but should you prefer that others not modify your work, this is perfectly ok, and you should state this, either within your post, or within your signature.

Images posted here should conform with the general forum guidelines. Image sizes should not exceed 950 pixels along the largest side (height or width) and typically no more than four images per post or thread.

Please also ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.

D200 ISO 1600 in lowlight conditions.

Postby bwhinnen on Mon Jun 25, 2007 4:10 pm

Yes I know more Motorsport!

But someone mentioned the D200 in lowlight high ISO, this is low ambient lighting, very overcast day at sunset or there abouts. Taken with the D200, 70-200VR. I need to grab the EXIF later on as it is not handy.

EXIF: ISO 1600, 200mm, 1/100, f3.2, Manual Exposure, Matrix Metering, D200, 70-200 VR.

ISO 1600
Image

IS0 1600 after noise reduction applied.
Image

ISO 1600 with half noise reduction applied.
Image

I don't think the original is that bad all things considered...

Cheers
Brett
Last edited by bwhinnen on Mon Jun 25, 2007 9:38 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
bwhinnen
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1234
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 11:12 am
Location: Cornubia, Brisbane

Postby jamesw on Mon Jun 25, 2007 4:23 pm

the 1st is not bad, but the 2nd is awesome!

what NR engine did you use?

perhaps, if you would not mind, could you supply a few 100% crops of some of that photo?
body: nikon d200, d70s, f4s, f601.
lens:nikon 35-70mm f2.8, 70-300mm f4-5.6, 10.5mm f2.8, 20mm f2.8, 28mm f2.8, 50mm f1.8.
flash: nikon sb600, sunpak 383 (x1), sunpak 555 (x4), pocketwizard plus II (x4)
jamesdwade.com
dishonourclothing.com
User avatar
jamesw
Senior Member
 
Posts: 771
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: norwood, adelaide

Postby bwhinnen on Mon Jun 25, 2007 4:30 pm

Original File is at home I'll have to grab it later on to grab the 100% crops. The engine was Neat Image, with the specific files for the D200 loaded.
User avatar
bwhinnen
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1234
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 11:12 am
Location: Cornubia, Brisbane

Postby sirhc55 on Mon Jun 25, 2007 4:37 pm

Noise is only a real problem when the exposure is not spot on - these are great Brett :)
Chris
--------------------------------
I started my life with nothing and I’ve still got most of it left
User avatar
sirhc55
Key Member
 
Posts: 12930
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 6:57 pm
Location: Port Macquarie - Olympus EM-10

Postby jamesw on Mon Jun 25, 2007 4:54 pm

sirhc55 wrote:Noise is only a real problem when the exposure is not spot on - these are great Brett :)


or - in my case a lot of the time - when your images have lots of shadow detail...

to get around it i use lots of artificial light to get around it, but having said that - i would like to give neat image or noise ninja a bit of a go - the prospect of being able to run the flashes at lower power levels to boost up recycle times...

looking forward to those 100% crops!
body: nikon d200, d70s, f4s, f601.
lens:nikon 35-70mm f2.8, 70-300mm f4-5.6, 10.5mm f2.8, 20mm f2.8, 28mm f2.8, 50mm f1.8.
flash: nikon sb600, sunpak 383 (x1), sunpak 555 (x4), pocketwizard plus II (x4)
jamesdwade.com
dishonourclothing.com
User avatar
jamesw
Senior Member
 
Posts: 771
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: norwood, adelaide

Postby bwhinnen on Mon Jun 25, 2007 5:13 pm

Please don't hold your breath there James :) I will try to get them tonight as time permits :D
User avatar
bwhinnen
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1234
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 11:12 am
Location: Cornubia, Brisbane

Postby jamesw on Mon Jun 25, 2007 5:14 pm

no stress, i'm in no rush, take your time!
body: nikon d200, d70s, f4s, f601.
lens:nikon 35-70mm f2.8, 70-300mm f4-5.6, 10.5mm f2.8, 20mm f2.8, 28mm f2.8, 50mm f1.8.
flash: nikon sb600, sunpak 383 (x1), sunpak 555 (x4), pocketwizard plus II (x4)
jamesdwade.com
dishonourclothing.com
User avatar
jamesw
Senior Member
 
Posts: 771
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: norwood, adelaide

Postby Oz_Beachside on Mon Jun 25, 2007 5:50 pm

steps to apply noise reduction?
User avatar
Oz_Beachside
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2227
Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 11:31 pm
Location: Black Rock, Victoria. D200

Re: D200 ISO 1600 in lowlight conditions.

Postby MCWB on Mon Jun 25, 2007 5:54 pm

You know what? I think I prefer #1, it fits the 956C a bit better than the cleaner look in #2. #1 could easily have been taken in the late 80s... :up:
User avatar
MCWB
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2121
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 10:55 pm
Location: Epping/CBD, Sydney-D200, D70

Postby Pehpsi on Mon Jun 25, 2007 7:36 pm

Nice shot, looks pretty sweet at 1600! I would probably go somewhere between the first and second shot with NR :)

I use NoiseNinja and bloody love it! It's flexible and super mega awesome..
Nikon D70
12-24 DX, 18-70 DX, 70-200 VR

20" iMac Intel C2D
Aperture 2.1
PS CS3

http://www.jamesrobertphotography.com
User avatar
Pehpsi
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1418
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 10:24 pm
Location: Kingsgrove, Sydney

Postby ATJ on Mon Jun 25, 2007 8:57 pm

I had to look very closely to see the difference between the two images, which suggest one or more of:
1) my monitor is not very good
2) my eyes aren't very good
3) there isn't a whole of difference.
User avatar
ATJ
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3982
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 10:44 am
Location: Blue Mountains, NSW

Postby bwhinnen on Mon Jun 25, 2007 9:17 pm

:) There is difference there, look in the brown patches in the background to see it, as I said it doesn't worry me too much at all. Also added an image with half reduction done in the first post.

Here are some links to 100% crops (sorry 800x536):

Original

Full Noise Reduction

Half Noise Reduction

The method I took with this photo is as follows;

1. Layer adjustment for Curves, bring in more contrast.
2. Layer adjustment for Hue / Sat.
3. Sharpening (very slight).
4. Colour space change to sRGB from Adobe 1998.
5. Resize to 800x536 , 72dpi.
6. Save for web at 90%
7. Apply Neat Image on D200 / JPEG Large Fine / ISO 1600 Profile
8. Use both default noise reduction and then a custom half reduction.

Cheers
Brett
User avatar
bwhinnen
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1234
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 11:12 am
Location: Cornubia, Brisbane

Postby Nigell on Mon Jun 25, 2007 9:21 pm

I don't quite understand the "noise" thing. Film has had grain for years, its part of the character of the image. The same is also true of digital.
User avatar
Nigell
Member
 
Posts: 244
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 9:24 pm
Location: Melbourne CBD

Postby Pehpsi on Mon Jun 25, 2007 9:28 pm

Just personal preference i guess :) (I'm a noise hater).

The third is my cup-o-tea...A good balance.
Nikon D70
12-24 DX, 18-70 DX, 70-200 VR

20" iMac Intel C2D
Aperture 2.1
PS CS3

http://www.jamesrobertphotography.com
User avatar
Pehpsi
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1418
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 10:24 pm
Location: Kingsgrove, Sydney

Postby bwhinnen on Mon Jun 25, 2007 9:35 pm

Nigell wrote:I don't quite understand the "noise" thing. Film has had grain for years, its part of the character of the image. The same is also true of digital.


I think it is just a digital thing, people want to see a extremely high ISO image with no noise characteristics, they are looking for the cleaner image without a lot of that character that film had.

I like a bit of both, some images scream take out the noise, others say leave me grainy I look better for it.

This was an image I played with, wanted to see how usable ISO 1600 was both with and without noise reduction applied. I only took a couple of images at this level at the event, most were at 400 or 800, which are quite usable.

Cheers
Brett
User avatar
bwhinnen
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1234
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 11:12 am
Location: Cornubia, Brisbane

Postby SteveGriffin on Mon Jun 25, 2007 9:48 pm

I agree. I think that the whole noise issue has been blown out of the water - mostly by Canon marketing people.

A number of cameras and photoshop filters are now on the market which add the noise / grain back into the image.

I like #1 with the noise and the clean (full noise reduction) version best
Steve
-------------------------------------------------------
So many things to do - so little time.
User avatar
SteveGriffin
Senior Member
 
Posts: 815
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2005 6:52 pm
Location: Rochedale Brisbane


Return to Image Reviews and Critiques