Noise
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /p/ - Photography
You are currently reading a thread in /p/ - Photography
I absolutely hate image noise. Mostly chromatic noise, but also luminance noise. Even on film. It drives me crazy that my 1.5x crop factor Nikon sensor produces as much noise as it does shooting RAW. Even if what you see on a screen is like 298% as big as the default print size assigned to the image by the camera, I want my images crystal fucking clear at that level.
Is it autism? Is noise in, say, situations where the so-called "gritty" look is not usual (like pic related) okay? If yes to both, can you slap it out of me, especially with photos that disprove my view that image noise is never, ever, EVER welcome?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make NIKON CORPORATION Camera Model NIKON D3200 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CC 2014 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/4.9 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Color Filter Array Pattern 1094 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 210 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 4000 Image Height 6016 Number of Bits Per Component 16, 16, 16 Compression Scheme Unknown Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 102 dpi Vertical Resolution 102 dpi Image Data Arrangement Chunky Format Image Created 2015:10:30 21:47:36 White Point Chromaticity 0.3 Exposure Time 1/320 sec F-Number f/5.6 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 3200 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash Focal Length 140.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 665 Image Height 1000 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control High Gain Up Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown
I'm new, what in pic related is noise?
>>2694885
Nothing. I just posted it as an example of a pic where you normally wouldn't use noise as an aesthetic effect.
...has lots of noise at 100%, as you can see here, but I also took it just to play with noise reduction.
>>2694889
Ah yes the noise is apparent now!
To me noise as an aesthetic effect seems like a cheap gimmick, but if the only way to get a shot is to get it with visible noise then it's better than nothing.
>>2694895
My problem is, no matter what picture I take I always want to reduce noise to absolutely zero. But that means loss of detail. It's almost like an obsession to me. Some people don't mind and you see lots of photos with noise everywhere, but it's starting to get a little OCD. I can reduce the noise in the photo there pretty well, but it'll never be satisfying without turning it into an inferno of blurriness.
>>2694897
Personally I think blur, unless on a fast-moving subject, looks worse than a little noise. Makes it look like you didn't focus.
>>2694897
Just to indulge your obsession. If you have a static scene and a tripod, you can take multiple shots and do a median blend to average out some of that noise.
>>2694884
Noise and grain are two very different things caused by very different reasons.
You took that at iso 3200, what the fuck were you expecting?
Why the fuck did you use those settings?
>>2694897
>I always want to reduce noise to absolutely zero. But that means loss of detail.
Yes, you can't have zero noise without sacrificing detail.
But moderate noise reduction can be counteracted with sharpening. (with masking to avoid sharpening the noise itself)
You can also selectively apply heavy noise reductions in the out of focus regions and the sky.
That's where noise mostly stands out, and there isn't much detail there anyways.
Not autism, just unrealistic and silly. It's like wanting a cloud to be a perfect circle.
>Exposure Time 1/320 sec
>F-Number f/5.6
>Exposure Program Manual
>ISO Speed Rating 3200
not op, but is noise and grain the same thing? are they words interchangeable or does grain only apply to film like "film grain"?
>>2695034
No. Noise is literally visualized signal noise (data being lost/corrupted because of interference, which can come from a variety of sources).
Grain is the resolution limit of films/papers. It's the crystals that are forming the image. Fine grain usually takes more light to expose (lower Iso)
>>2695009
is that photo from the movie, the guyver? where is the armor from?
>>2695036
ah, thanks for the explanation.
>>2695040
halo 5 mate
nathan fillion has a pretty good track record/history with bungie
>>2694884
>shoot iso 3200 in daylight
>complain about noise
is this bait?
>>2695052
You mean 343
>>2694884
What does anon think of his photo with a tad bit of orange in it?
>>2695087
no bungie he was in ODST and his voice was in Reach I think
>See post complaining about noise
>relatively bright scene
>Non-moving subject
>ISO 3200
>1/320
>Manual exposure
>I HATE NOISE
pls, pls learn to set ISO and take the camera away from Auto ISO
>>2694884
Chromatic noise can be removed during raw conversion in the noise removal settings, set luminance to 0, and chroma I think to 25. That's usually the default setting and just desaturates the noise.
Imagenomic Noiseware can do the same with film scans if you set the noise level for luma to 0 when removing noise on film scans.
