Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Olympus dSLR

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 10, 2006, 11:52 AM   #1
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,065

I brought this here because i figure some of you guys have more experience with this than me and i can trust your judgement without getting flamed. I changed cameras just awhile back from a C7070 to an LC1, and I now see the benefits of a lot less noise, I thought I might work on it a bit to improve things more, or just plain understand it.

LC1 can be noisy in circumstances where there is shaddow in otherwise low light. Its a scenario i meet quite often because is shoot real estate so i see this all time. To minimise the effects, im moving to a metz 54 flash system with considerably more punch, judicious use of a stofen when required, and i only use iso100. Noise Ninja in PP usually cures the ills, I say usually...

Given the aperture control on LC1 is nice and fine, should i slightly overexpose to reduce noise?
Is there anything else I could be doing to improve things?

thanks in advance

edit to add: you might want to look at this, because it doesnt sound right to me

Rriley is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Dec 10, 2006, 12:57 PM   #2
Senior Member
HarjTT's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,469

Hi Riley

Here's an article by Michael Richeman on exposing to the right - noway I could ever explain how it works but I'm going to give it a try.




:? :O
HarjTT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2006, 1:15 PM   #3
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,402

I don't know that I necessarily agree with the statement that smaller/more compressed files deal better with high ISO noise, either. If it worked for him in his tests, good for him. I don't know that'll always produce consistent results, and what if that one image presented itself, you want to print it bigger, but you shot it at a smaller file size, limiting the ultimate size you could print it at? I would never suggest shooting at anything smaller than the biggest file size your camera can produce. It's always easier to make a file smaller later than trying to up-size one to make a bigger print.

Nothing will turn noise uglier than underexposure. It didn't take too many underexposures from my E-300 to realize that, but situations ofmultiple lighting conditionsintroduces multiple problems of trying to retain highlight detail and balance that with keeping some detail in the shadows. Generally, I try to expose with a bias towards the highlights (slight overexposure) and shooting RAW, which gives me some wiggle room to recover a certain amount of both shadow detail and retain detail in thehighlights. I don't know if your camera gives the ability to shoot RAW, but if notyou could bracket a series of three shots, one underexposing, one overexposing and one "correct" exposure, then combine the portions of all three that look good into one optimum image with Layers in a program like Photoshop.

I posted a similar answer here with examples:


and here are some more:

Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2006, 11:25 PM   #4
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,065

hi Harj, Greg
thanks for the responses and the links

yes i figured that guys technique was a little odd
seems to pre-suppose that lower res images incorporate reduced noise

I have been slightly underexposing images (throwback from kodachrome64 days) which is probably what has been killing me. And the EVF while fine for composition is inadequate for guaging exposure

i can shoot raw with LC1, but im really out in the woods with it, i have zip experience with RAW, and because i assume PP is slower i avoid it for work.

that said i think i need to get better aquianted with it, if only for special circumstances, for fun or for difficult shots.

I find the metz helps a lot, but I am using it manually while the adapter shoe shows up from overseas. The Oly FL36 i also have was a lot easier to control manually via the thumbwheel but there is no denying the power of the Metz in some situations

Rriley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2006, 11:48 PM   #5
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,065

and just to add what i forgotten to mention
i use layered images as i have photomatix, i obtained this as a solution for 1 common problem

that is, when shooting a house upsun, i either would lose sky detail or have too dark shadow areas. Now i get out the tripod, expose for sky and for shaddow and merge the two later.

Im not sure about using this technique often for interiors though. I have a need to work pretty quickly inside the house. It is commonly an invasive process for the client and most of them like to get it over with quickly.

And more on that, it isnt the worlds best paying job, so keeping the PP time down, and the time on site are key to being successfull. The photomatix solution came about because of the commonality of shooting upsun, and the need to get that shot (called the money shot) right. It meant I didnt have to return at some other time of day when lighting might be more favourable. Thus saving time, and speeding delivery.

Rriley is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:46 PM.