High Grain/Low ISO Question..

l.k.madison

So I'm putting the finishing touches on a wedding before I order prints and I've noticed something that's bugging me: A LOT of my outisde/shot at 3:30 in the afternoon/plenty of light shots have a really weird grain to them. One shot will be in crystal clear focus, two shots later (nearly identical settings) and it's fuzzy. I can't figure out why. I did have my flash on, working as a fill (I shot into the sun for a good bit and was playing with glare), could it be because the camera assumed the flash would light everything up? I do shoot full manual by habit but the camera's supposed to be smarter than me at this sort of thing, right?

Hubby and I are stumped as to how this happened, I'm hoping on some seasoned pros to voice their ideas ::hint hint::

Here's the fuzzy example, shot with a Canon 40D, 17-55 mm at f/2.8, ISO at 320, shutter speed is 1/5000 (which again, grain at those numbers? :dunno) Feel free to look at it in full size on Flickr, I fear the wrath of a mod if I post the huge one. *it isn't fully edited, ignore the coloring, it's the quality that has me stumped.


Here's a great example: Same camera, same lens, same ISO, this shutter speed was 1/8000 (which I would think would cause more grain..)


I can't figure it out, any ideas?

SimpsonBrothers

Looking at the large image it looks like the focus was off. The bricks 3 feet in front of the groom are in better focus than those at his feet.

heatherfeather

My guess:
The first seems a bit underexposed for the circumstance... if you brought it up any at all in post, that would explain the grain. The couple is strongly backlit, so it would have tricked your in cam light meter... Usually I find the grain when I don't nail the exposure at the moment and bring it up in post. That will creat a grainy photo at any ISO.

The second one looks as though they were properly exposed and didn't need any adjustment in post, so that is why there is no grain.

Anyway... that is my guess.

Moogle Pepper

Can you post bigger samples?

The 2nd Shot would be cooler at f/2.8 and flowers further in front of them so their heads would be in the bokeh.

l.k.madison

Wow, you guys are fast!!!

Here's the SOOC versions of both, as big as flickr will let me blow them up (I don't have a smugmug, sorry guys).





I didn't think about changing exposure making grain, I knew that it would, but that thought never went through my head, that might be it, though..

I still can't figure out why there's grain at all, honestly. I'd be ok with a little, but these look like a ISO 800 out of my XT.

jbakerphoto

The noise problem could also be due to you using a fractional iso. Check this out...

http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=960201&postcount=2

Blurmore

I'll second the possibility of the fractional ISO thing...I don't use them unless I absolutely have to (on the high end). Otherwise I'm at 100, 200, 400, 800 or 1600. From my own experience the ISO between the ISOs from 100 to 400 are the worst on the 40D and ISO 500, 640, and 1250 aren't so bad because you expecting the noise anyway.

Qarik

frankly I don't see any noise..just some underexposure and missed focus

Scott_Quier

Looking at the SOOC version of #1, I would say that you did a pretty good job with the exposure and got bit by the fractional ISO thing (see below).

Some things to thing about ...

• As Heather has already mentioned, pushing the exposure in post (attempting to correct under-exposure) is a sure way to induce grain.
• Fractional ISO on Canon cameras can induce problems. Ziggy has posted some informtion on this here. Based on this information (and others), I shoot at ISO 100, 200, 400, 800, ... you get the idea. I find shooting at these full-stop ISO settings to be resolution enough to get the job done. I do the fine exposure adjustment using either aperture or shutter-speed (or both).
• As for the camera being smarter about something than you - almost never true! The camera does not and can not know everything you know about the scene you are attempting to capture and can know nothing about what it is you intend. For posed shots, it's almost always better to shoot in Manual mode, especially when using E-TTL flash for fill and then use FEC to adjust the duration (power) of your flash.
• Noise is caused by changes shutter speed or aperture only to the extent that such changes cause the image to be under-exposed. If the image is well exposed at 1/200 (or 1/2000), it will be well exposed at 1/100 (or 1/1000), assuming you make appropriate aperture adjustments.
• Shooting with flash at 1/5000 - you need to be setting your flash to High-Speed Shutter Sync (HSS). When set to HSS, the effectiveness of your flash is dramatically reduced. If you were more than 10 or 15 feet from your B&G, it's a good bet that your flash didn't contribute much (if anything) to the exposure.

All that aside and while you didn't ask for it, I would council that you not include the first shot in deliverable to your client. It's a miss for a number of reasons:

• Pole, antenna, bridge running through the bride's head
• Bridge running through the grooms head
• Faces of both very much under-exposed. I don't think you can pull them up without some serious damage.
• Missed-focus - your plane of critical focus is some distance in front of the groom's feet

But, I really like the second shot - that's cute and I think your clients are going to love that one.

l.k.madison

Scott_Quier wrote:

Looking at the SOOC version of #1, I would say that you did a pretty good job with the exposure and got bit by the fractional ISO thing (see below).

Some things to thing about ...

• As Heather has already mentioned, pushing the exposure in post (attempting to correct under-exposure) is a sure way to induce grain.
• Fractional ISO on Canon cameras can induce problems. Ziggy has posted some informtion on this here. Based on this information (and others), I shoot at ISO 100, 200, 400, 800, ... you get the idea. I find shooting at these full-stop ISO settings to be resolution enough to get the job done. I do the fine exposure adjustment using either aperture or shutter-speed (or both).
• As for the camera being smarter about something than you - almost never true! The camera does not and can not know everything you know about the scene you are attempting to capture and can know nothing about what it is you intend. For posed shots, it's almost always better to shoot in Manual mode, especially when using E-TTL flash for fill and then use FEC to adjust the duration (power) of your flash.
• Noise is caused by changes shutter speed or aperture only to the extent that such changes cause the image to be under-exposed. If the image is well exposed at 1/200 (or 1/2000), it will be well exposed at 1/100 (or 1/1000), assuming you make appropriate aperture adjustments.
• Shooting with flash at 1/5000 - you need to be setting your flash to High-Speed Shutter Sync (HSS). When set to HSS, the effectiveness of your flash is dramatically reduced. If you were more than 10 or 15 feet from your B&G, it's a good bet that your flash didn't contribute much (if anything) to the exposure.

All that aside and while you didn't ask for it, I would council that you not include the first shot in deliverable to your client. It's a miss for a number of reasons:

• Pole, antenna, bridge running through the bride's head
• Bridge running through the grooms head
• Faces of both very much under-exposed. I don't think you can pull them up without some serious damage.
• Missed-focus - your plane of critical focus is some distance in front of the groom's feet

But, I really like the second shot - that's cute and I think your clients are going to love that one.

THANK YOU, Thank you, Thank you, Scott.. That was tons of information in a few short sentences. As far as the backgrounds, that's a very hard place to shoot, tons of buildings, boats/barges, etc. Great location (and special to them) but it's just a killer. As an FYI, that's one of two Mississippi River Bridges that splits Baton Rouge, we were on the east side .

Well, and others that commented as well, next time I'll shoot only on an increment of 100 .

And we blew up the first shot to see exactly what happened, the focus is on her dress and since they aren't on the same plane, the focus was on the bricks on his feet AND her dress instead of both of them. She did order it, but she ordered it as a 4x6, so fingers crossed that in a print that small, what we see will be harder to spot.

Thank you again for everybody that contributed.

barbnjon

I also shoot with a 40d. I almost always have to add exposure in camera sometimes a full stop. I'm calling Canon today to see what they can do. It's still a great camera!

DeeCajun

I don't see grain, just a tad sharper would be make a nice photo nicer..

I know you asked for opinion on the grain but I do love the look on the grooms face as he looks over
at his bride.. That is what I see when I look at that picture, I am sure they will love it!

Matthew Saville

If that is the largest image that Flickr will allow you to post, crop a 100% crop for us?

Scott pretty much said it all. If you're outdoors, shoot at ISO 100. WHY THE HECK would you shoot at ISO 320 if you have a stabilized lens and 1/5000 shutter speed? (Not asking really, just asking rhetorically... Next time, shoot at ISO 100. Done deal.) ...Or even shoot in "LO", if your scene is in soft enough light to lose a stop of highlights. Expose your images to the right, avoid intermediate ISO's, and don't edit images too much in post. Especially with a crop-sensor camera, all of these errors will be magnified. Noise reduction technology has gotten really awesome at higher ISO's, but is VERY taboo at lower ISO's so there is just no way to hide the difference between crop and full-frame sensors... Just check any reviews of the recent crop-sensor cameras- ISO slowly climbs till about 400 or 800, then actually levels off or DROPS as NR kicks in. So check your reviews, and avoid that mid-range peak in noise...

=Matt=

l.k.madison

Short answer, Matt: because I'm just learning. I did bridals as a favor for a friend, and while they were beautiful, I fought and fought and fought my grain, to realize that I shot her outside-at-four-thirty-in-the-afternoon shots were ALL done with 800 ISO. It's one of those settings I forget to check, I have the rest of it down, but I just forget to check that for some reason.

And thanks, Dee, maybe us Cajuns have to stick together. Those two were so in love it was sickening at times, she claimed they were uncomfortable with PDA, but I would have NEVER believed it from the way they kept smiling at each other. The pictures of him kissing her head were just the sweetest ones, her face showed so much emotion. As much of a stickler as I am about what shots the clients see, if they want it (and I approve, of course) they can have it. My favorites are NEVER their favorites.

I have a newborn shoot on Saturday (inside, using a huge window and my softboxes) and I'll shoot on 100, just for ya'll (I said I was a Cajun, didn't I?).

Scott_Quier

l.k.madison wrote:

I have a newborn shoot on Saturday (inside, using a huge window and my softboxes) and I'll shoot on 100, just for ya'll (I said I was a Cajun, didn't I?).

No!!! You should be shooting at whatever ISO gives you the aperture and shutter speed you need. You can and should be planning ahead, but you should also have a backup plan, just in case there's no sun that day and the walls are black and ..... Yes, I know the walls are unlikely to be black, but you can't count on the sun - it might be very overcast, in which case you need a backup plan...

l.k.madison

Scott_Quier wrote:

No!!! You should be shooting at whatever ISO gives you the aperture and shutter speed you need. You can and should be planning ahead, but you should also have a backup plan, just in case there's no sun that day and the walls are black and ..... Yes, I know the walls are unlikely to be black, but you can't count on the sun - it might be very overcast, in which case you need a backup plan...

I've shot in their house before, I did her maternity shots back in November and my ISO was on the lower end, 200, maybe as high as 400, but I don't think it was that high. That day it was bitter cold and rainy so the windows weren't an option. I did have both of my softboxes and we used those for light.

I wasn't totally serious about the shooting at 100, promise, that's why I added the smiley.

Matthew Saville

l.k.madison wrote:

Short answer, Matt: because I'm just learning. I did bridals as a favor for a friend, and while they were beautiful, I fought and fought and fought my grain, to realize that I shot her outside-at-four-thirty-in-the-afternoon shots were ALL done with 800 ISO. It's one of those settings I forget to check, I have the rest of it down, but I just forget to check that for some reason.

And thanks, Dee, maybe us Cajuns have to stick together. Those two were so in love it was sickening at times, she claimed they were uncomfortable with PDA, but I would have NEVER believed it from the way they kept smiling at each other. The pictures of him kissing her head were just the sweetest ones, her face showed so much emotion. As much of a stickler as I am about what shots the clients see, if they want it (and I approve, of course) they can have it. My favorites are NEVER their favorites.

I have a newborn shoot on Saturday (inside, using a huge window and my softboxes) and I'll shoot on 100, just for ya'll (I said I was a Cajun, didn't I?).

No worries! Just one of those habits you gotta get into. Always checking the ISO before making an important image. I've taken plenty of important images at ISO 1600, haha...

=Matt=

Scott_Quier

Matthew Saville wrote:

No worries! Just one of those habits you gotta get into. Always checking the ISO before making an important image. I've taken plenty of important images at ISO 1600, haha...

=Matt=

Yeah, me too. At the Glacier Shootout (Oct 2007), one of the things schmoo was frequently heard to say was, "What day is it? It's 'Check your ISO day!'"

So, yup, I try to check my ISO before every important image and when I move from one light source to another (like from inside to outside, etc).

VayCayMom

Oh I know the feeling of forgetting to check my settings!! I am getting better about it. It's part of the learning process. Unwanted grain is something i have struggled with, I just began shooting with a light meter and it has helped tremendously!
On another note, the couple used fake flowers not very pretty ones either. A kindness might be to not put much focus on them.

DeeCajun

l.k.madison wrote:

Short answer, Matt: because I'm just learning. I did bridals as a favor for a friend, and while they were beautiful, I fought and fought and fought my grain, to realize that I shot her outside-at-four-thirty-in-the-afternoon shots were ALL done with 800 ISO. It's one of those settings I forget to check, I have the rest of it down, but I just forget to check that for some reason.

And thanks, Dee, maybe us Cajuns have to stick together. Those two were so in love it was sickening at times, she claimed they were uncomfortable with PDA, but I would have NEVER believed it from the way they kept smiling at each other. The pictures of him kissing her head were just the sweetest ones, her face showed so much emotion. As much of a stickler as I am about what shots the clients see, if they want it (and I approve, of course) they can have it. My favorites are NEVER their favorites.

I have a newborn shoot on Saturday (inside, using a huge window and my softboxes) and I'll shoot on 100, just for ya'll (I said I was a Cajun, didn't I?).

Yes us Cajuns need to stick together. Starting at 100 is a good rule of thumb, I am learning myself but try to use the light meter and bump up or down in settings to get different outcomes. I go back and look to see what my settings were on the pics i like and make a mental note. Then I forget it all and start over

l.k.madison

Edit:

I shot 8 day old Hannah with ISO at 100, about a 1/3 or 2/3 slightly over-exposed, her shots are in their own thread to show ya'll what happens when I pay attention to what I'm doing!!

Ed911

In your first shot...where the camera appears to have focused on the bricks prior to the subject...may be due to to focus recomposition. This is where the focal plain changes when you focus on the couples faces/eyes, then recompose the image while holding the shutter release half way down. You wind up with the focal point on their belly buttons causing the focal plain to be behind their heads and in front of their feet.

If you did focus and recompose the shot, next time use the selector on your camera to move the focus point to their heads while framing their whole bodies. Given that you are similar in height...give or take a little, you will now have a correctly focused shot, with sharp facial features, and everything else will also be in focus.

Just my two cents. Hope this helps.

Skadoosh

i use imagenomic noiseware... you can download the community edition for free... it will get a good bit of grain out of your pics (although sometimes at the cost of clear focus)

it is a very easy program to use. i usually adjust the noise level adjustment to 5-15% depending on how much grain is in the picture and leave the noise suppression section alone.

after it processes you can click on the image and see the before/after effects... i've always been happy with it and what can i say its FREE!

l.k.madison

Skadoosh wrote: »

i use imagenomic noiseware... you can download the community edition for free... it will get a good bit of grain out of your pics (although sometimes at the cost of clear focus)

it is a very easy program to use. i usually adjust the noise level adjustment to 5-15% depending on how much grain is in the picture and leave the noise suppression section alone.

after it processes you can click on the image and see the before/after effects... i've always been happy with it and what can i say its FREE!

Thanks!! I'll look into that. I've sent a few pictures through Bibble to clean them up and it helped out a good bit.

I shot a wedding in July on ISO 400 at 2.8 throughout and had issues with grain there as well. We were informed as everybody was leaving the rehearsal that the officiant didn't want us using flash, after he watched us flash on and off for two hours trying to make sure we could light up the whole church with one setting (yes, I know, two hour rehearsal...grr) so we were forced to do what we could. Apparently, my 40D needs some serious light

Jay25

l.k.madison wrote: »

Here's the fuzzy example, shot with a Canon 40D, 17-55 mm at f/2.8, ISO at 320, shutter speed is 1/5000 (which again, grain at those numbers? ) Feel free to look at it in full size on Flickr, I fear the wrath of a mod if I post the huge one. *it isn't fully edited, ignore the coloring, it's the quality that has me stumped.





I can't figure it out, any ideas?

Your first photo, 2.8 on a far day like that. Too low for an F-stop. If she is a tad in front of him he might be out of focus. Move your F stop above 5.6. Try a higher F stop 9 or 10. I love using 2.8. But I started hating it for the same reason.

sweet caroline

Jay25 wrote: »

Your first photo, 2.8 on a far day like that. Too low for an F-stop. If she is a tad in front of him he might be out of focus. Move your F stop above 5.6. Try a higher F stop 9 or 10. I love using 2.8. But I started hating it for the same reason.

I end up shooting a lot of couples at 5.6 because it usually burs the background enough, but keeps both people in focus.

mmmatt

sweet caroline wrote: »

I end up shooting a lot of couples at 5.6 because it usually burs the background enough, but keeps both people in focus.

Don't try to set it and forget it with your aperture settings. That is what P mode is for. USE your aperture to get the effects you want. KNOW what each lens does at various apertures and distances. Proper use of DOF is one of the main differences between a snapshot and a professional image IMHO. Bracket with your DOF so you can make the final call in post. Make decesions of how you want to portray your background/secondary subject and use the proper aperture setting to achieve that. Use your outside focal points and/or focus and recompose to get focus on the eyes. Focus and recompose works 90% of the time IME. Certainly there are times where you just take what you can get, but most of the time you can do it just like you want it.

there are 3 things that effect DOF
1. Focal length
2. Distance to subject
3. Aperture

This is photo 101 stuff, and as a professional photographer we should all have a very good understanding on how this works with our own equipment!!! My old Canon 1N film body had a really cool feature that was automatic DOF. You could focus on 1 subject and then lock in on a second subject and it would calculate the aperture for you. I don't know why they don't have that anymore! maybe that is still on the 1D's.

I'll get off my soapbox, but it breaks my heart to hear people sacrificing good, conscientious photography just to make things easy. Not trying to pick on you Caroline... many people quote aperture settings thinking they can translate across the board but they can't. Huge difference between f5.6 on a 200mm vs a 24mm, or f5.6 on a 100mm at 5 ft vs 20 ft. No easy way, you just need to know your gear, and chimp or bracket when it is critical.

Matt