Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Hot Woman, Fast Car & Moon Shot

Subject: Re: [OM] Hot Woman, Fast Car & Moon Shot
From: "Johnie Stafford" <jms@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2013 15:35:12 -0500
Moose,

Thanks for the great information. Sorry for not replying sooner, I've had
some Diabetes-related vision issues that has made reading the computer
screen difficult. Noise reduction in my photos has been impossible as well
since my vision in general is similar to something like a 60k ISO image.
Hopefully, in the near future my vision will be clear again and I'll get to
apply these techniques. 

Johnie Stafford
McKinney, TX
jms@xxxxxxxxx

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Moose [mailto:olymoose@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 1:16 AM
> To: Olympus Camera Discussion
> Subject: [OM] Hot Woman, Fast Car & Moon Shot
> 
> OK, here's fulfillment of the teaser. :-) <http://zone-
> 10.com/tope2/main.php?g2_itemId=8005>
> 
> On 8/25/2013 3:50 PM, Johnie Stafford wrote:
> >> ...
> >> There's something wrong here. That level of 'noise' is just not what
the E-
> M5 does at ISO 200. ...
> >>
> >> Moon shots have a very narrow DR for the moon itself. First steps
> >> that are often useful are NR and using Levels to spread the histogram
> >> and set the midpoint.  Then fewer other adjustments are necessary.
> >>
> >> Those two steps alone, on a small JPEG already over processed in some
> >> way, make a dramatic improvement in this image.
> >>
> >> Level Headed Moose
> > No Lightroom at all. At the time all I had was Olympus Viewer. I'm
> > just trying to learn how to digitally process images. I got my copy of
> > LR late this week and that just gives me more options to get my arms
> around. ...
> >
> > So I appreciate any and all digital processing advice.
> 
> All the examples are in one place.
> <http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/Others/Stafford/Moon_1.htm>
> 
> First of all, something bad happened to this image. Look at '100%'. The
EXIF
> says ISO 200. Now look at  'E-M5 ISO 200 noise', that's what the noise
should
> be, extremely subtle, fine grained and even. Even then, I would apply NR,
as
> illustrated. The effect may seem subtle, but subsequent processing may
> make the minimal nose obvious, sometimes in an ugly way.
> 
> Now check 'E-M5 ISO 3200 noise'. Yes, quite a bit of noise, but much more
> even and consistent than in the moon sample.
> NR deals well with this. The first NR setting would be suitable for an
image
> with lots of detail, which tends to mask noise. The second setting is good
for
> this low detail image.
> 
> Was the image underexposed, so you had to up exposure or brightness a
> lot? That will give the kind of wormy noise I see.
> Then some other processing options will make it worse.
> 
> As to the dynamic range of the image, moon shots, as well as a lot of long
> tele shots, tend to have a very limited DR, and look flat. You can see in
the
> first example, simply the image as posted, how the moon has a range of
> about 1/3 of the histogram. Looking at the inset, you see the settings I
used
> in PS Levels to spread the histogram out and adjust the mid point,
resulting in
> the second sample. See how its histogram is filled, bottom to top, with
the
> moon data.
> 
> There are a number of other subjects where a limited DR is desirable, for
> example, spectral trees in mist.
> 
> You can do the same thing in Viewer* and in ACR, although it requires
> adjustments in two places, one to move the top and bottom and then an
> exposure or brightness increase to move the central point. I assume LR is
like
> ACR in this regard, but I heartily dislike LR, so I don't have it.
> 
> * If you have Viewer 2, you should download and install 3 here.
> <http://support.olympus-imaging.com/ov3download/index/>
> 
> > Speaking of which, there are a million resources out there for how to
> > process raw images. Could I get some recommendations?
> 
> That's a tough one. Even those of us who are relatively adept often differ
in
> our methods. Chuck talked about the NR in ACR; I've never, as far as I can
> recollect, used that. I eschew LR and similar apps, others find PS too
complex
> and/or expensive.
> 
> There are endless tutorials. I hope you easily find the generalized
guidance
> you need. Specific questions could be asked here.
> 
> Moose D'Opinion
> 
> --
> What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
> --
> __________________________________________________________
> _______
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz