This topic is in the 2004 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2004Noise reduction by INCREASING ISO
p.1 #1Noise reduction by INCREASING ISO
Canon 10D is blessed with a reasonably low noise level, but still it becomes somewhat noticeable at ISO 800. Here is a way to reduce the noise at the exposure time by INCREASING the ISO.
Looking through the Phil's DPreview of 10D http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos10d/page18.asp I noticed that the noise is increasing slower than the ISO. In particular, when the ISO changes by a factor of 2 from 800 to 1600 the noise level increases only from 2 to 2.5, that is only by a factor of 1.25!
Based on that observation, I thought that instead of taking a picture at 800, I can increase the ISO to 1600 and dial +1 stop compensation to overexpose the sensor by 1 stop, that is by a factor of 2. (Don't dial the compensation when you are in Manual, of course, just keep the settings the same). Then (I presume that shooting is in RAW) one can dial down the exposure by one stop during the RAW development. The expected signal to noise gain would be 2/1.25=1.6 compared to just shooting at 800.
Below is an example that illustrates that. A grey card was shot with a 50/1.4 lens, indoors, RAW, AWB, focused at infinity. The first patch was shot at ISO 800 and 1/200s f/4.0, which was the normal exposure for the ambient light. The middle patch was at ISO 1600 and 1/200s f/4.0, that is overexposed by 1 stop and then brought down by 1 stop during development with C1. The right patch was shot at ISO 1600 and 1/400s f/4.0, that is normally exposed.
To my surprise, the middle patch exhibits the lowest amount of noise as visually, as well as measured by Noise Ninja.
http://www.pbase.com/image/26490579.jpg
Edited by gfiksel on Feb 29, 2004 at 12:12 PM GMT
Looking through the Phil's DPreview of 10D http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos10d/page18.asp I noticed that the noise is increasing slower than the ISO. In particular, when the ISO changes by a factor of 2 from 800 to 1600 the noise level increases only from 2 to 2.5, that is only by a factor of 1.25!
Based on that observation, I thought that instead of taking a picture at 800, I can increase the ISO to 1600 and dial +1 stop compensation to overexpose the sensor by 1 stop, that is by a factor of 2. (Don't dial the compensation when you are in Manual, of course, just keep the settings the same). Then (I presume that shooting is in RAW) one can dial down the exposure by one stop during the RAW development. The expected signal to noise gain would be 2/1.25=1.6 compared to just shooting at 800.
Below is an example that illustrates that. A grey card was shot with a 50/1.4 lens, indoors, RAW, AWB, focused at infinity. The first patch was shot at ISO 800 and 1/200s f/4.0, which was the normal exposure for the ambient light. The middle patch was at ISO 1600 and 1/200s f/4.0, that is overexposed by 1 stop and then brought down by 1 stop during development with C1. The right patch was shot at ISO 1600 and 1/400s f/4.0, that is normally exposed.
To my surprise, the middle patch exhibits the lowest amount of noise as visually, as well as measured by Noise Ninja.
http://www.pbase.com/image/26490579.jpg
Edited by gfiksel on Feb 29, 2004 at 12:12 PM GMT
Feb 29, 2004 at 10:39 AM
p.1 #2Noise reduction by INCREASING ISO
This makes little to no sense to me... How does the +1 help ? Is the noise more visible in the darker colors, so that is why this is helping ??
Feb 29, 2004 at 11:06 AM
p.1 #3Noise reduction by INCREASING ISO
Yes, you might say that, the noise is more noticeble at lower light levels. If you just shoot at 1600, normally exposed, then the noise increase is huge - see the right patch. By overexposing at 1600 and compensating this overexposure during RAW development, the noise goes down - see the middle patch.
Feb 29, 2004 at 11:12 AM
Guest
Offline
Guest
Details
p.1 #4Noise reduction by INCREASING ISO
Interesting observation! Have you tried camparing ISO 1600 to 3200 pulled 1 stop? I wonder how much worse than 800 it would be for the extra stop...
Feb 29, 2004 at 12:00 PM
p.1 #5Noise reduction by INCREASING ISO
You may be on to something.... I just took two shots (RAW ) at ISO 1600, one was pushed by 1 stop and the other was not.
Brought them both into Photo shop CS and did nothing but pull the overexposed one
down by -1.
Then zoomed into a dark area to see the noise. There was much less noise in
the pushed picture. and even more detail shows in it also...
pushed....
http://www.pbase.com/image/26494002.jpg
not pushed...
http://www.pbase.com/image/26493990.jpg
Brought them both into Photo shop CS and did nothing but pull the overexposed one
down by -1.
Then zoomed into a dark area to see the noise. There was much less noise in
the pushed picture. and even more detail shows in it also...
pushed....
http://www.pbase.com/image/26494002.jpg
not pushed...
http://www.pbase.com/image/26493990.jpg
Feb 29, 2004 at 12:04 PM
p.1 #6Noise reduction by INCREASING ISO
Jack Flesher wrote:
Interesting observation! Have you tried camparing ISO 1600 to 3200 pulled 1 stop? I wonder how much worse than 800 it would be for the extra stop...
Haven't done it yet. Also, as I recall, 3200 on 10D is not a real ISO, it's actully 1600 at 1 stop compenstaion so, I'm afraid it will be a wash.
Interesting observation! Have you tried camparing ISO 1600 to 3200 pulled 1 stop? I wonder how much worse than 800 it would be for the extra stop...
Haven't done it yet. Also, as I recall, 3200 on 10D is not a real ISO, it's actully 1600 at 1 stop compenstaion so, I'm afraid it will be a wash.
Feb 29, 2004 at 12:09 PM
p.1 #7Noise reduction by INCREASING ISO
You can overexpose a grey card, but not real life...
That's whats making the difference here.
The bottom line is to use the lowest ISO you can,
while getting the most light possible to the sensor.
That's whats making the difference here.
The bottom line is to use the lowest ISO you can,
while getting the most light possible to the sensor.
Feb 29, 2004 at 12:12 PM
p.1 #8Noise reduction by INCREASING ISO
skid00skid00 wrote:
You can overexpose a grey card, but not real life...
That's whats making the difference here.
The bottom line is to use the lowest ISO you can,
while getting the most light possible to the sensor.
Totally agree with you.
Unfortunately, often there is a limit imposed on how much light you can get.
A specific example: You're shooting an indoor baskeball game and the normal exposure at ISO 800 is 1/200s f/2 . You can't increase the exposure - it's already the maximum lens opening and the shutter speed already borderlines with the motion blur. If you just dial ISO 1600, the normal exposure changes to 1/400s and f/2.0 So far so good but at the expense of increased noise level. Bring down the shutter speed back to 1/200s and keep shooting. That would overexpose the sensor by one stop but it can be compensated during RAW development. The final result - less noise that at the original settings ISO 800 is 1/200s f/2.
Hope, my intentions are clear.
Gennady
You can overexpose a grey card, but not real life...
That's whats making the difference here.
The bottom line is to use the lowest ISO you can,
while getting the most light possible to the sensor.
Totally agree with you.
Unfortunately, often there is a limit imposed on how much light you can get.
A specific example: You're shooting an indoor baskeball game and the normal exposure at ISO 800 is 1/200s f/2 . You can't increase the exposure - it's already the maximum lens opening and the shutter speed already borderlines with the motion blur. If you just dial ISO 1600, the normal exposure changes to 1/400s and f/2.0 So far so good but at the expense of increased noise level. Bring down the shutter speed back to 1/200s and keep shooting. That would overexpose the sensor by one stop but it can be compensated during RAW development. The final result - less noise that at the original settings ISO 800 is 1/200s f/2.
Hope, my intentions are clear.
Gennady
Feb 29, 2004 at 12:19 PM
p.1 #9Noise reduction by INCREASING ISO
kites4 wrote:
Here is the pushed ISO1600 picture not zoomed.... the other two pictures is of his
hair braid.... remember the 1D has much more noise than the 10D to begin with
so this isn't too bad at all.... and this was shooting in a dim room, hand held.
not the best pic, but good for testing noise out here.
Wow, nice kitty!
Here is the pushed ISO1600 picture not zoomed.... the other two pictures is of his
hair braid.... remember the 1D has much more noise than the 10D to begin with
so this isn't too bad at all.... and this was shooting in a dim room, hand held.
not the best pic, but good for testing noise out here.
Wow, nice kitty!
Feb 29, 2004 at 12:27 PM
Guest
Offline
Guest
Details
p.1 #10Noise reduction by INCREASING ISO
gfiksel wrote:
Haven't done it yet. Also, as I recall, 3200 on 10D is not a real ISO, it's actully 1600 at 1 stop compenstaion so, I'm afraid it will be a wash.
Yes, but the push is "in camera" while the pull is in CS
Almost all digital cameras have a "native" ISO, and ISO increases are simply "pushes" from that base ISO. I am thinking it is the processing that goes on during the pull in CS that lowers the noise.
Just a thought...
Jack
Jack Flesher wrote
Interesting observation! Have you tried camparing ISO 1600 to 3200 pulled 1 stop? I wonder how much worse than 800 it would be for the extra stop...Yes, but the push is "in camera" while the pull is in CS
Almost all digital cameras have a "native" ISO, and ISO increases are simply "pushes" from that base ISO. I am thinking it is the processing that goes on during the pull in CS that lowers the noise.Just a thought...
Jack
Feb 29, 2004 at 12:32 PM
p.1 #11Noise reduction by INCREASING ISO
I bet the noise is even less if you shoot at 2 stops 'over-exposed' and pull the image back '2 stops' during raw processing, for the excercise of shooting a grey card.
The real lesson is to shoot with an exposure setting that is as close to 'over-exposed without losing any details' as much as possible. The more 'over-exposed' the image is (still without losing details), the lower is the noise level. That is why this is a nice excercise in shooting a grey card, but hard to implement in real world when the tonal range of a scene is much higher than 1 stop.
Edited by slau on Feb 29, 2004 at 11:49 AM GMT
The real lesson is to shoot with an exposure setting that is as close to 'over-exposed without losing any details' as much as possible. The more 'over-exposed' the image is (still without losing details), the lower is the noise level. That is why this is a nice excercise in shooting a grey card, but hard to implement in real world when the tonal range of a scene is much higher than 1 stop.
Edited by slau on Feb 29, 2004 at 11:49 AM GMT
Feb 29, 2004 at 12:42 PM
p.1 #12Noise reduction by INCREASING ISO
Isn't this the same thing as "exposing to the right" as discussed by Michael Reichmann?
See
http://luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/expose-right.shtml
See
http://luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/expose-right.shtml
Feb 29, 2004 at 12:45 PM
p.1 #13Noise reduction by INCREASING ISO
Ummm, if you overexpose by a full stop, you're probably going to blowing highlights out the wazoo.
This assumes you have a scene with any decent amount of dynamic range to begin with, and that you were properly exposing to begin with.
This assumes you have a scene with any decent amount of dynamic range to begin with, and that you were properly exposing to begin with.
Feb 29, 2004 at 12:48 PM
p.1 #14Noise reduction by INCREASING ISO
slau wrote:
I bet the noise is even less if you shoot at 2 stops 'over-exposed' and pull the image back '2 stops' during raw processing, for the excercise of shooting a grey card.
The real lesson is to shoot with an exposure setting that is as close to 'over-exposed without any details' as much as possible but still retains all details. The more exposed the image is (still without losing details), the lower is the noise level. That is why this is a nice excercise in shooting a grey card, but hard to implement in real world when the tonal range of...Show more →
Agree.
That's why 2 stops may be too much. Hey, even 1 stop can be to much when shooting outdoors in bright light, but then usually the noise is not a problem too
For shooting indoor sports one stop is usually tolerable.
I bet the noise is even less if you shoot at 2 stops 'over-exposed' and pull the image back '2 stops' during raw processing, for the excercise of shooting a grey card.
The real lesson is to shoot with an exposure setting that is as close to 'over-exposed without any details' as much as possible but still retains all details. The more exposed the image is (still without losing details), the lower is the noise level. That is why this is a nice excercise in shooting a grey card, but hard to implement in real world when the tonal range of...Show more →
Agree.
That's why 2 stops may be too much. Hey, even 1 stop can be to much when shooting outdoors in bright light, but then usually the noise is not a problem too
For shooting indoor sports one stop is usually tolerable.
Feb 29, 2004 at 12:51 PM
p.1 #15Noise reduction by INCREASING ISO
DavidP wrote:
Ummm, if you overexpose by a full stop, you're probably going to blowing highlights out the wazoo.
.
Not necessarily, shooting in RAW makes it possible. Not always, but still..
Ummm, if you overexpose by a full stop, you're probably going to blowing highlights out the wazoo.
.
Not necessarily, shooting in RAW makes it possible. Not always, but still..
Feb 29, 2004 at 12:54 PM
Guest
Offline
Guest
Details
p.1 #16Noise reduction by INCREASING ISO
The good news is that this process can still be useful in a LOW light situation, where (as David points out) you aren't blowing highlights -- or at least important ones fully. And I guess in this regard it is essentiually the same as Reichmanns "expose to the right" concept when relegated to extremely low light levels... Or maybe we should call it "exposing for the shadows", since in very low light a significant portion of the image is generally in a shadow .
. Feb 29, 2004 at 12:55 PM
p.1 #17Noise reduction by INCREASING ISO
MikeBinOKlahom wrote:
Isn't this the same thing as "exposing to the right" as discussed by Michael Reichmann?
See
http://luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/expose-right.shtml
I think so. I would even call it "exposing to over the right"
Isn't this the same thing as "exposing to the right" as discussed by Michael Reichmann?
See
http://luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/expose-right.shtml
I think so. I would even call it "exposing to over the right"
Feb 29, 2004 at 02:52 PM
p.1 #18Noise reduction by INCREASING ISO
I agree with Mike B. this is the concept of exposing right. There are several articles about this topic and a very good one can be found on Roger Cavanagh's website. There is also an interview I read with the developers of Adobe Camera Raw who explain why this works. It is because half of the entire dynamic range information of a photograph comes from the right 1/5 of the historgram. Therefore, if you expose right as far as you can without blowing the highlights and then adjust EC in development you will increase dynamic range and decrease noise. I highly recommend looking up articles on this topic.
Stephen
Stephen
Feb 29, 2004 at 02:54 PM
p.1 #19Noise reduction by INCREASING ISO
Jack Flesher wrote:
The good news is that this process can still be useful in a LOW light situation...
Yes, and not only that but also when increasing the light throughput is unattainable or undesirable my other means (the shutter speed, the lens opening, screaming at the referees... )
The good news is that this process can still be useful in a LOW light situation...
Yes, and not only that but also when increasing the light throughput is unattainable or undesirable my other means (the shutter speed, the lens opening, screaming at the referees...
)Feb 29, 2004 at 02:57 PM
p.1 #20Noise reduction by INCREASING ISO
This discussion can be summarized as follows: "don't underexpose when shooting at high ISO".
Gennady, the fact that you could overexpose by one stop and still keep all detail, indicates that you underexposed in your ISO 800 shot. Indeed it is good advise not to underexpose shots for a fear that using a higher ISO level would introduce more noise. Also, in dimly lit situations there is less risk of blowing out highlights.
Gennady, the fact that you could overexpose by one stop and still keep all detail, indicates that you underexposed in your ISO 800 shot. Indeed it is good advise not to underexpose shots for a fear that using a higher ISO level would introduce more noise. Also, in dimly lit situations there is less risk of blowing out highlights.
Feb 29, 2004 at 03:08 PM