Dealing with noise

[Joaquin Barbará]

I got this picture a couple of days ago while trying to figure out if Auto-ISO was a good idea. The camera decided to use iso 2200, SS was kept at 1/1250 and f/5.6 using a D7100 and a 300mm f/4 + TC 1.4. The image was processed first in LR and then exported to PS where it was processed using Topaz ReMask a mask of the bird was made, duplicated and inverted. Topaz DeNoise was used both on the bird and on the background. On the bird using the Shadow Mild setting and the BG using the Strong Setting. A new adjustment layer was created on the BG and the brightness was decreased and the contrast increased.


Thanks for your comments in advance.
Joaquin.

[Joaquin Barbará]

[Joaquin Barbará]

[Joaquin Barbará]

[Sandy Witvoet]

Hi Joaquin,
Would it be possible to post just your favorite? Looks like rather harsh incoming light and although you retreived details on the last image, it looks rather "blue" to me....and seems to have some artifacts around the wings. This is a really cool incoming "flight", with the twig.... a bit more space may help also. Is this a Cormorant?

[Diane Miller]

Actually I find this a good way to evaluate what has been done to an image. Pane 1 should be the finished image, pane 2 shows it as it came into LR, with the camera /shooting settings, and pane 3 shows the final LR adjustment with settings before it went to PS.

But I don't understand why pane 4 is there. Pane 1 should be the finished image out of PS. Maybe a mixup in screen shots? -- easy to do.

[Joaquin Barbará]

Diane, Pane 4 is the finished image with the histogram. I was wondering if I should include that one.

Can someone tell me if this is OK with the forum rules?

I personally like it very much when Diane offers advice after tweaking someones image and returns the LR screen capture with the sliders and histograms. That helps me learn a lot more than "I decreased the highlights a little, tweaked the shadows a tad, some slight increase in the whites and a little bit in the blacks", that DOES NOT help me learn. I am artistically challenged and have a difficult enough time figuring out what the "pleasant composition" is, I love to be able to see that someone decreased the highlights by "-5" and that now their histogram is not clipped on the right side as mine was originally.

I also think that it is very helpful to see someones original capture. It helps understand someones thought process. "I would have given it a little bit more space on the left" turns out not to be a very useful comment if there is a huge branch out of focus on the left. I think that seeing the original image helps those who offer a critique to understand what the OP was originally working with. My guess is that seeing the original capture sometimes the best advice for some of my photographs will be "that image is poor, save yourself some headaches, go shoot some more and try again".

Again please some clarification of the rule of the forum would be greatly appreciated. I am new here and it is way to early to start making people angry.

To everyone that has critiqued my images again a sincere thank you, in a very short amount of time I thin I have learned quite a bit. I hope to continue on this path.

[Diane Miller]

I'm new here, too, and welcome other people's input. There is a lot to keep up with on BPN and the people who can give the best input will probably be the busiest ones. For me, what makes sense in most cases is this (and this is assuming LR, but would probably work for other RAW editors):

Pane 1: the finished image, after RAW conversion and PS (or whatever you use) to the best of your ability. Include here comments on what you did in PS since it won't show elsewhere. This is what most people will critique.

Pane 2: the initial image coming into the RAW converter, which shows the original composition and the metadata (camera) data.

Pane 3: the image after RAW parameters are applied, including the LR sliders. This will be what went into PS. Showing these two screenshots were a great idea, Joaquin!

Some people will comment on these early stages.

If the early (RAW conversion) stages are all you are asking about, then no need to do the PS version. In that case I'd show what I listed in Pane 3 first, the Pane 2.

If the question is about sharpness or IQ issues, including a 100% (1:1) screenshot before and after any processing is a good idea.

And you're right -- this is all about learning! On all the forums.

[Sandy Witvoet]

Hi Joaquin.... I'm a newbie too.... and do try to provide some input from a viewer's perspective and hope it to be helpful .... I understand what your panes are showing now... Diane stated it very well!