Glasgow

[Ulfric M Douglas]

Re: Glasgow

But was Noise Reduction off? By default it is ON, and fairly deep in the menus : hard to switch off by accident ...
But very easy to see if its on or off : camera takes two lengthy exposures when its ON, which feels irritating but I think it does a pretty decent job.

[scott76]

Re: Glasgow

Guys thanks so much for your help so far.took me a while to reply as work was calling.Think we have established the exposure was way too long.This was bugging me so much that last night before bed I checked the noise reduction & filter to find out both were off.noise reduction is now ON and I have put noise filter to STANDARD.what do we think?

[IainMacD]

Re: Glasgow

With noise reduction switched on permanently it will only kick in for shots of 8 seconds or longer when using ISO100 or 4 seconds or longer at higher ISO.
My preference for noise filter was Low when I had the 510 as I found that Standard affected the level of detail - try some test shots and see what suits the 520 and your own tastes before you commit or regret using the wrong setting.

[scott76]

Re: Glasgow

Never had a lot of time yesterday during my 18 hrs shift Took a few shots this time with the noise reduction on and filter set to low.Just stopped somewhere to try and test.This is the best of 6 a time was against me.solely trying to reduce the noise compared to the first batch how do we think its went?

[David M]

Re: Glasgow

You guys do realise you'll be getting diffraction at those apertures?

[sponner]

Re: Glasgow

nise wise it looks fine to me

[alfbranch]

Re: Glasgow

The exposure time alone did not cause the noise
Here is a shot taken at 105 seconds ISO 200 and F8 this shot is a Jpeg straight out of the camera with no processing.


Whitehaven est pier by alf.branch, on Flickr

Having read a few articles about noise in Amateur Photographer on the technology of sensors and noise ratios the most important factor is accurate exposure.

I have found that it is true the noisiest images are the ones where you are pulling the most detail from underexposed areas.

[scott76]

Re: Glasgow

Alf do u think the picture of the house is an improvement noise wise compared to the original set?? I have not altered the house pic just put it up solely to see if the noise was improved .

[alfbranch]

Re: Glasgow

Scott that shot is a big improvement in noise levels. One big improvement that can be made for this type of shot is shooting at dusk not in the dark.

The exposure was not too long BTW can you answer some the questions in my first post?

I have taken 3 minute exposures that have shown little noise but try pulling detail from an underexposed shot from my camera and the noise will really show.

Watch this the filter isnt necessary IMO. Not where I learned from but I saw it posted elsewhere.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcpwOTSNFI8"]Taking Pictures after Sunset with Bryan Peterson - YouTube[/ame]

[scott76]

Re: Glasgow

Sorry yes I did shoot RAW .I did very little processing to them tbh in Photoshop 6

[alfbranch]

Re: Glasgow

Scott watch this video its quite good.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7JqcC2h5zk"]Advanced Sharpening and Noise Reduction in Photoshop - YouTube[/ame]

[scott76]

Re: Glasgow

Quite advanced but I should b able to do this OK as I'm progressing with Photoshop.trying to pick up info each time I go on.I'm off to Italy tomorrow so will definitely give this a go when home.your help has been invaluable and I thank you so much