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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 25, 2010, 4:50 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,156
Default another birdie picture this one @3200ISO

Taken with the E-30 using the 50-200mm ED Lens (version 1).
ISO3200.

No noise reduction software i.e. neat image,noise ninja, etc. used.

I did however, clean up noise by using the median tool in PSE v8.0.

I set the value at one, then used the unsharp mask slider 'til I got the sharpness I liked.
Attached Images
 
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old May 25, 2010, 5:15 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,520
Default

"The Median Tool"....

This is something I have not heard of. No doubt, it's in Photoshop if it's in Elements. It definitely gave excellent results. I need to find and look into that.

Thanks for the info.
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 25, 2010, 5:26 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,156
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Chappell View Post
"The Median Tool"....

This is something I have not heard of. No doubt, it's in Photoshop if it's in Elements. It definitely gave excellent results. I need to find and look into that.

Thanks for the info.
Hi Greg,

In Elements, it's located under the filter tab>then look in the noise section>you'll see median. It's a slider that basically works like gaussian blur (at least that's the way I think of it).
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 25, 2010, 6:23 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Washington State
Posts: 930
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zig-123 View Post
Hi Greg,

In Elements, it's located under the filter tab>then look in the noise section>you'll see median. It's a slider that basically works like gaussian blur (at least that's the way I think of it).
Median at 1 or 2 followed by USM used to be my standard noise reduction method, especially for scanned negatives, though I used the dust and scratch tool as well. It's a very useful and quick way to deal with noise.

John
jelow1966 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 25, 2010, 7:09 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,156
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jelow1966 View Post
Median at 1 or 2 followed by USM used to be my standard noise reduction method, especially for scanned negatives, though I used the dust and scratch tool as well. It's a very useful and quick way to deal with noise.

John
Hi John,

It is funny that what goes around comes around. My method of choice, when first starting out with Elements, was just what you described- a value of 1, maybe 2, then a little USM to sharpen the photo up a bit.

Over time, I got Neat Image and while I have to say I like it, the median tool works surprisingly well. Point of fact, I first tried cleaning up this image in Neat Image and didn't like the results nearly as much as to what I posted.

Zig
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26, 2010, 4:54 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: south west pennsylvania
Posts: 415
Default

Zig, this is a clean looking image for 3200 iso, I will have to try the median filter, have never used it before. Thanks for the info.
Charles
cshanaberger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26, 2010, 8:25 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,156
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cshanaberger View Post
Zig, this is a clean looking image for 3200 iso, I will have to try the median filter, have never used it before. Thanks for the info.
Charles
Hi Charles,

Part of the reason this image is as 'clean' as it is, is due to making sure, I didn't under expose the shot. I think Greg (Fieldspringer) made that point in another recent post and I wanted to reiterate, what I think, is a very important
factor in determining the amount of 'unwanted' noise ends up in your photo.

zig.
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2010, 8:21 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
boBBrennan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Arlington, Texas USA
Posts: 3,565
Default

....hi Zig

I continue to be amazed at your bird images, thanks too for the tip re..the median filter. Though I no longer (since the MAC) use PS it is fun to learn of feature usage.

As for exposure levels, I should never have noise in a file, though I do, it seems any more most of my stuff is over compensated for exposure.
boBBrennan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2010, 9:50 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 722
Default

Zig,
Great shots you are taking with the higher ISOs. I have to believe the camera and lens have a lot to do with it as there is no way I can shoot 1600 ISO with my 510 and 70 300 without a lot of noise being present. I find that anything over 400 starts getting quite a bit of noise. Of course the light has a lot to do with it but still I see a big difference between the two cameras abilities themselves.
Eric
eharrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2010, 1:55 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,156
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by boBBrennan View Post
....hi Zig

I continue to be amazed at your bird images, thanks too for the tip re..the median filter. Though I no longer (since the MAC) use PS it is fun to learn of feature usage.

As for exposure levels, I should never have noise in a file, though I do, it seems any more most of my stuff is over compensated for exposure.
Hi Bob and Eric,

Thanks for the kind comments. But, to put this in it's proper perspective. One little item that I don't generally talk about too much is the number of "keeper" shots that I actually get during the coarse of shooting these little critters. I'm up to about 50% keeper shots. That to me, is pretty dismal when you consider that I'm generally around 4ft away from the subject. You would think that, at that range, it would be a snap. But something always happens to mess up a shot.


And Eric, yes, I really do believe that in my case anyways, the equipment does make the difference. The E-30 handles noise IMHO quite well despite what I read about it on other forms. I had the E-510 and used it with the 50-200mm ED. I must have shot 3000 to 4000 bird images with that combo
and I can tell you that the E-30 50-200mm combo is just a whole lot better.
Faster AF speed, less hunting, and as you can see, better high ISO performance.

Zig
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


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 8:44 AM.