DLSR raw photo question??

Myteemouse

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Sep 7, 2009
Messages
913
Reaction score
6
Location
Tacoma
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I'm wondering where all my white noise is coming from when I shoot in RAW but when I shoot in "L" jpeg format I get clearer sharper photos
Same camera same lighting same settings just raw and Jpeg
Now dont mind the color difference in these two photos but please tell me What one was shot raw and what one was Jpeg format..
IMG_3948.jpg

oct82010001-1.jpg
 
OP
OP
Myteemouse

Myteemouse

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Sep 7, 2009
Messages
913
Reaction score
6
Location
Tacoma
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
yep it was.. Now why does it have more little specks in places (noise) that the other doesn't?!?the second was shot regular jpeg format and it's clearer.. Why is that?!?
 

cparka23

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 12, 2008
Messages
725
Reaction score
4
Location
Republic of Dave
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Apologies if I'm preaching to the choir, but you have understand that jpeg conversion does things to the image besides just make it take less disk space. In addition to compression, there are other algorithms applied that alter the look of the image to make it more presentable. The point of shooting in RAW is to have your own control over the details you want to preserve, so you're image is going to look initially less polished than in JPEG.
 
OP
OP
Myteemouse

Myteemouse

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Sep 7, 2009
Messages
913
Reaction score
6
Location
Tacoma
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I got that.. Thanks I do understand better now. BUT..
at view at actual pixels on my screen.. the jpeg pic is crystal clear. and the raw pic (even right off the camera before editing at all) has alot of noise on the pic and isn't as clear..
Is this me and I need to edit the clarity in?!?!? if so please explain . Tomorrow I will go to actual pixels and crop the two out and show you with no editing at all.just save as..
 

m and m

2500 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Messages
3,705
Reaction score
24
Location
Nj
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
They have the same amount of niose. The only noise that can be seen in this image is in the top in the blue area and both have it. a simple color balance (levals) will fix your top image maybe tuch your curves a tad bit..
 

iani

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 9, 2007
Messages
1,022
Reaction score
27
Location
Berkeley, CA
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
If you brighten up the bottom picture you will probably get more noise.

What ISO are you taking the shots at? What camera are you using?
 

cparka23

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 12, 2008
Messages
725
Reaction score
4
Location
Republic of Dave
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
EXIF says canon XSi, manual mode, 55mm lens, 1/6s, f10 for both images.

Yes, I see the noise pretty easily. First, the jpeg is in sRGB and the raw photo was converted to jpeg using Adobe RGB. It probably won't make a difference, but it's something to play around with. Very few LCD monitors can properly display the full gamut of Adobe RGB. Second, I've heard a few times that Adobe Camera Raw's default jpeg conversion settings are pretty mediocre. I bet that this is where you're getting most of these artifacts.
 

gparr

Waterbox Keeper
View Badges
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
2,137
Reaction score
19
Location
NW Chicago Suburbs
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
This shot is going to be very noisy no matter what you do. The difference between the exposure required to retain detail in the zoanthid centers and the rest of the image is too great. Since you retained detail in the centers, you've significantly underexposed the rest of the image, thus generating noise. Note that easily 2/3 of your image is dark background. You'll get much better results if you fill the frame as much as possible with the zoanthids and eliminate all of that dark background. Noise-reduction software may be needed with this image.

As has been discussed, you can't compare a jpg out of the camera with an unprocessed RAW file. Jpg files have been manipulated in the camera, sometimes considerably. RAW files have not been touched and include everything that the camera's sensor captured. You have to decide what the image will look like, i.e., you get to make it look like it should look.

Shooting subjects, under actinics, that have a wide exposure range can be challenging.

Gary
 
OP
OP
Myteemouse

Myteemouse

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Sep 7, 2009
Messages
913
Reaction score
6
Location
Tacoma
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
thank you guys.. this all helps alot.
I will need to do some post editing to remove noise and to brighten the pic up.. thanks.
 

blurry

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Dec 13, 2009
Messages
388
Reaction score
69
Location
Jordan NY (in-between Rochester and Syracuse)
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I'm very new to photography so take my opinion with a grain of salt. The grain in the RAW looks a lot lot like the grain from shooting with a high ISO. Try going to aperature priority with an f stop around 11. if you have your main lights on you should have no problem shooting with ISO 100. I have to turn my exposure down a notch at times with the halides on.

here is one of the first pictures I shot [first] raw, and [second] post color correction. The depth of field is shot, but you get the idea:

D3100 with kit lens

raw:
dsc0010asmall800.jpg



post processing
frogspawndsc0010wbsmall.jpg
 
OP
OP
Myteemouse

Myteemouse

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Sep 7, 2009
Messages
913
Reaction score
6
Location
Tacoma
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
thanks guys I really was just asking about the NOISE in the photo.. thats all.. thank you all
I will work on more post editing with raw photos
 

Just grow it: Have you ever added CO2 to your reef tank?

  • I currently use a CO2 with my reef tank.

    Votes: 8 6.3%
  • I don’t currently use CO2 with my reef tank, but I have in the past.

    Votes: 5 4.0%
  • I have never used CO2 with my reef tank, but I plan to in the future.

    Votes: 6 4.8%
  • I have never used CO2 with my reef tank and have no plans to in the future.

    Votes: 101 80.2%
  • Other.

    Votes: 6 4.8%
Back
Top