# 5D3 candle light High ISO (102400)



## RS2021 (Feb 24, 2013)

5D3 candle light shot at ISO H2 (102400)

*Set up:* Shot with 35L. Zero lights in any of the rooms with only the candle seen. Aperture priority f/1.4 generates shutter speed 1/1000 sec. House cat is mostly dark grey and you can see her under normal lighting in another post: 
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=314.msg226144#msg226144

*LR4 and export: * Everything that had a sliding dial on LR4, I set to zero (first pic and crop). No sharpening, no NR etc… WB was ‘as shot’. LR4, by default, wanted to set NR “color” slider to 25 which clearly cleans up the picture a bit even if everything else is still at zero (second pic and crop). I am not a post-processing officianado, so be gentle.

I realize I can get a much cleaner picture by using a sensible ISO and slower shutter speed, but I just wanted to play with the extended ISO a bit. Coming from film, not so many years ago, getting a relatively discernible image at such low light and high shutter speeds would not even be thinkable for me. I do see the banding up top and the general ugly noise, but either today’s sensors are wonderful or I am one of those saps who is too easily pleased. Cheers!  


Edit: Just uploaded the original CR2 Raws to skydrive, hope this works:

The primary shot used here at 1/1000 sec: 

https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=1F78FF9C09DCA480!ADK2oOGh3O_uCXI

An extra shot that is slightly more exposed at 1/800 sec taken moments apart with the same setup as the primary:

https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=1F78FF9C09DCA480!107&authkey=!AOL_-sdrd4HXRmY


----------



## jrista (Feb 24, 2013)

Any chance you could run that through Topaz Denoise 5, and run the debanding algorithm? I'm just curious to see if you can clean the banding and luma noise up any more.


----------



## Sith Zombie (Feb 24, 2013)

Yeah, I get what you mean. I remember iso 400 film had a lot of grain, now we can shoot up to 1600 on most cameras, with decent results


----------



## RS2021 (Feb 24, 2013)

jrista said:


> Any chance you could run that through Topaz Denoise 5, and run the debanding algorithm? I'm just curious to see if you can clean the banding and luma noise up any more.



I don't own the software but I will try their trial version and post the result. Looks like an interesting series of programs.


----------



## East Wind Photography (Feb 24, 2013)

I generally shoot in RAW and would pull these into Photoshop Camera RAW for processing. Generally speaking as you noticed the chroma noise is easily filtered either in camera converted to a jpg or using software after the fact but after the fact it must be RAW format.

The grain can also be significantly reduced through the luminance filter and maybe some masking. At this high ISO you cant apply the luminance filter too much if you have to crop much at all. Therefore if you know you have to use H1 or H2 mode then you need to fill the frame as much as possible to reduce the grain size with respect to your subject. I would have got MUCH closer to the cat.

The shots are pretty good otherwise, just needs some TLC in a good post processing package. 




Ray2021 said:


> 5D3 candle light shot at ISO H2 (102400)
> 
> *Set up:* Shot with 35L. Zero lights in any of the rooms with only the candle seen. Aperture priority f/1.4 generates shutter speed 1/1000 sec. House cat is mostly dark grey and you can see her under normal lighting in another post:
> http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=314.msg226144#msg226144
> ...


----------



## jrista (Feb 24, 2013)

East Wind Photography said:


> I generally shoot in RAW and would pull these into Photoshop Camera RAW for processing. Generally speaking as you noticed the chroma noise is easily filtered either in camera converted to a jpg or using software after the fact but after the fact it must be RAW format.
> 
> The grain can also be significantly reduced through the luminance filter and maybe some masking. At this high ISO you cant apply the luminance filter too much if you have to crop much at all. Therefore if you know you have to use H1 or H2 mode then you need to fill the frame as much as possible to reduce the grain size with respect to your subject. I would have got MUCH closer to the cat.
> 
> The shots are pretty good otherwise, just needs some TLC in a good post processing package.



I am not sure you would have much detail to start with, though, at such a high ISO. Not only do you have to deal with read noise, which eats away at shadow detail no matter what you do, there just isn't enough light at such a fast ISO to really give fine detail any real substance. I'd be interested in seeing Ray2021's original images with moderate and heavy lumi NR in lightroom as well as the Topaz adjustments, just to see how the images look. I bet a pretty healthy amount of NR could be applied, maybe with LR's "detail" slider (which is really just a way to tune the deconvolution) set to around 85-90...which should preserve a lot of the detail that does exist. Topaz Denoise 5 should eliminate the banding without seriously affecting the detail present.

I'd bet that image could be cleaned up considerably, although it certainly suffers on the color fidelity and dynamic range front....nothing you can do about those.


----------



## RS2021 (Feb 24, 2013)

Jrista, thanks for the Topaz suggestion. Here is the deNoise program version. I just installed the trial and played with it for the first time. Cleans up the banding significantly.


----------



## distant.star (Feb 24, 2013)

.
Thanks. Interesting to see.

The noise cleans up well, but as always, at the expense of detail -- not a bad thing here. The lighting supports a soft focus look.


----------



## RS2021 (Feb 24, 2013)

jrista said:


> I am not sure you would have much detail to start with, though, at such a high ISO. Not only do you have to deal with read noise, which eats away at shadow detail no matter what you do, there just isn't enough light at such a fast ISO to really give fine detail any real substance. I'd be interested in seeing Ray2021's original images with moderate and heavy lumi NR in lightroom as well as the Topaz adjustments, just to see how the images look. I bet a pretty healthy amount of NR could be applied, maybe with LR's "detail" slider (which is really just a way to tune the deconvolution) set to around 85-90...which should preserve a lot of the detail that does exist. Topaz Denoise 5 should eliminate the banding without seriously affecting the detail present.



Is there a web spot where I can share the ~22MB raw outside of the CR site? The upload limit at CR obviously is well below that. 



jrista said:


> I'd bet that image could be cleaned up considerably, although it certainly suffers on the color fidelity and dynamic range front....nothing you can do about those.



Not only the insane ISO, but even the 1/1000sec is crazy short at first blush for me. I think overexposing the shutter speed to 1/500 could produce some additional fidelity in the shadows and increase DR. It will likely blow out the candle highlights completely.


----------



## pedro (Feb 24, 2013)

Hi Ray, this is great stuff. What a nice coincidence ;-) Did we post the same topic just yesterday? Great! Here's my thread. And I even opened a Group over at flickr called *Insane ISOs*. Whoever likes to join, you are more than welcome! *http://www.flickr.com/groups/insane_isos/*
Your 102.400 cleans up nice! let's go to the limit...you 102kers rock! 
Cheers, Pedro

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=13147.0

And here's the picture



Z96A3506bTLKLEINBW by Peter Hauri, on Flickr

*Here's my catshot from about a few weeks ago, in comparison to yours it was taken at ISO 51200 "only" 8)*



Shooting my Cat at ISO 51k by Peter Hauri, on Flickr


----------



## Stephen Melvin (Feb 24, 2013)

Here's one I did when experimenting the camera when I first bought it. 24mm, 1/25, f/1.4, ISO 102000. All processing done with Lightroom. The light sources is from a street light about 150 feet outside the house. I could barely see her. The AF assist lamp from my 580EX solved the focus issue.


----------



## pedro (Feb 24, 2013)

@Stephen: I saw your pic back then and was very impressed! That added to my purchase as well, when I got my copy of a 5D3. It is an "insanely" good camera. Cheers to you, Pedro


----------



## RS2021 (Feb 24, 2013)

pedro said:


> Here's my catshot from about a few weeks ago, in comparison to yours it was taken at *ISO 51200 * "only" 8)



Hi Pedro, no coincidence at all... I was actually inspired by your original cat pic and wanted to test with more stringent (loony? lol) conditions... given the detail we see in the comfortor I thought you had "low" but some morning light to provide the DR apparent. I also wanted to push the ISO to the max. I really didn't expect to see much at all in the pitch black room with a point light source, but was pleseantly surprised, so I wanted to share.

For the record, I will never take shots like this in in the dark at 1/1000sec in real life. but I am learning a lot in the process of this experiment


----------



## jrista (Feb 24, 2013)

Ray2021 said:


> Jrista, thanks for the Topaz suggestion. Here is the deNoise program version. I just installed the trial and played with it for the first time. Cleans up the banding significantly.



It cleans it up for sure, but it looks like the settings are too strong. There is definitely more detail in the originals. I'd scale back the NR in Topaz a bit. You want to eliminate noise without blurring detail. It doesn't need to be 100% noise free...maybe more like the amount of noise you might have at ISO 800 or 1600. That should preserve detail, while making the noise "acceptable".


----------



## jrista (Feb 24, 2013)

Ray2021 said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > I am not sure you would have much detail to start with, though, at such a high ISO. Not only do you have to deal with read noise, which eats away at shadow detail no matter what you do, there just isn't enough light at such a fast ISO to really give fine detail any real substance. I'd be interested in seeing Ray2021's original images with moderate and heavy lumi NR in lightroom as well as the Topaz adjustments, just to see how the images look. I bet a pretty healthy amount of NR could be applied, maybe with LR's "detail" slider (which is really just a way to tune the deconvolution) set to around 85-90...which should preserve a lot of the detail that does exist. Topaz Denoise 5 should eliminate the banding without seriously affecting the detail present.
> ...



You could try SkyDrive. You get 7gigs free, and you can make folders public.



Ray2021 said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > I'd bet that image could be cleaned up considerably, although it certainly suffers on the color fidelity and dynamic range front....nothing you can do about those.
> ...



Proper NR can recover a lot of the DR lost in the shadows. You could expose the light source higher, but keep in mind, you only have a few stops of DR at ISO 102400 (I think around 4 stops for the 1D X), and that is limited by physics.


----------



## RS2021 (Feb 24, 2013)

Stephen Melvin said:


> Here's one I did when experimenting the camera when I first bought it. 24mm, 1/25, f/1.4, ISO 102000. All processing done with Lightroom. The light sources is from a street light about 150 feet outside the house. I could barely see her. The AF assist lamp from my 580EX solved the focus issue.



Love the film grain look... I had no flash mounted so my 35mm was strugling to lock focus and I am not sure it really did.


----------



## pedro (Feb 24, 2013)

Ray2021 said:


> pedro said:
> 
> 
> > Here's my catshot from about a few weeks ago, in comparison to yours it was taken at *ISO 51200 * "only" 8)
> ...



*@Ray:* Wow. Thanks for this one. You did great! Dare to go the limits, it is less harmful than bungee jumping 8)


----------



## TrumpetPower! (Feb 24, 2013)

So long as we're posting pictures taken in the dark of our cats...here's Baihu the evening I got the 5DIII. 85mm @ 1/4s @ f/1.8 @ ISO 25,600, and then about another stop altogether added in post...call it EV -6, handheld. The main light is from the LED on a battery charger about six feet to his right. The rest of the light is coming from that computer monitor several feet behind him in the top of the frame.

I don't remember how I got this in focus, as I really couldn't see a bloody thing.

That the camera can make pictures like this in settings where a human is blind...well, I'm sure not going to ever do this sort of thing other than on a lark, so I'd say that its low light abilities are much more than I actually need.

Anybody else who needs more than this needs a head examination more than they need a better camera....

Cheers,

b&


----------



## Stephen Melvin (Feb 24, 2013)

Stephen Melvin said:


> Here's one I did when experimenting the camera when I first bought it. 24mm, 1/25, f/1.4, ISO 102000. All processing done with Lightroom. The light sources is from a street light about 150 feet outside the house. I could barely see her. The AF assist lamp from my 580EX solved the focus issue.





Ray2021 said:


> Love the film grain look... I had no flash mounted so my 35mm was strugling to lock focus and I am not sure it really did.



I did use a number of tools that LR offers, including adding grain. I add grain to nearly all of my images these days as it is; it helps images look more natural, as far as I'm concerned. It definitely helps with pattern noise.


----------



## RS2021 (Feb 24, 2013)

distant.star said:


> .
> Thanks. Interesting to see.
> 
> The noise cleans up well, but as always, at the expense of detail -- not a bad thing here. The lighting supports a soft focus look.



Yes, the "vasaline-on-filter" look to use an old term.


----------



## pedro (Feb 24, 2013)

TrumpetPower! said:


> Anybody else who needs more than this needs a head examination more than they need a better camera....
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> b&



BIG LOL... Therefore I'll be the first to stand in line for one 8) I mean, a better camera... ;D


----------



## TrumpetPower! (Feb 24, 2013)

Ray2021 said:


> WB was ‘as shot’.



That's actually contributing a fair amount to the distracting noise in the scene. And the amped-up saturation doesn't help at all, either.

Here's the image after some basic tweaking of the sliders in ACR.

Temperature: -58
Tint: -54
Exposure: +0.3
Contrast: -43
Highlights -40
Shadows: +38
Whites: -100
Blacks: -64
Clarity: 0
Vibrance: 0
Saturation: -38

Cheers,

b&

P.S. If I were going to make something "real" of this, I'd also mask in some selective desaturation of the darkest backgrounds. b&


----------



## RS2021 (Feb 24, 2013)

Just uploaded the CR2 raw files to skydrive, hope this works:

The primary shot used here at 1/1000 sec: 
https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=1F78FF9C09DCA480!108&authkey=!ADK2oOGh3O_uCXI

A slightly more exposed 1/800 sec shot taken moments apart with the same set up as the primary:
https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=1F78FF9C09DCA480!107&authkey=!AOL_-sdrd4HXRmY


----------



## RS2021 (Feb 24, 2013)

TrumpetPower! said:


> Ray2021 said:
> 
> 
> > WB was ‘as shot’.
> ...



Nice, her natural grey color is more evident, but the candle is gone all green. 




TrumpetPower! said:


> P.S. If I were going to make something "real" of this, I'd also mask in some selective desaturation of the darkest backgrounds. b&



Ye Gods! I will not attempt a shot with these extreme conditions/settings or frame it this way in real life...but I am finding it to be a great experimental vehicle to keep learning


----------



## Stephen Melvin (Feb 24, 2013)

Ray2021 said:


> Just uploaded the CR2 raw files to skydrive, hope this works:
> 
> The primary shot used here at 1/1000 sec:
> https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=1F78FF9C09DCA480!108&authkey=!ADK2oOGh3O_uCXI
> ...



Here's my work with the primary, using Adobe Lightroom. It took about five minutes:







This is what you posted:





Here's the XMP sidecar file. You can use it to make the changes and look at what I did.
http://galleries.stevemelvin.com/Primary 1-1000sec.xmp


----------



## RS2021 (Feb 24, 2013)

Stephen Melvin said:


> Here's the XMP sidecar file. You can use it to make the changes and look at what I did.
> http://galleries.stevemelvin.com/Primary 1-1000sec.xmp



Thanks Stephen, can't seem to open the url ... I could be doing something basic that's off. Cheers.


----------



## Stephen Melvin (Feb 24, 2013)

Ray2021 said:


> Stephen Melvin said:
> 
> 
> > Here's the XMP sidecar file. You can use it to make the changes and look at what I did.
> ...



It took me a few attempts to get it to show up right. You probably caught it before I was able to correct it. Right-click and save it. Then place it next to the .CR2 file, making sure they are named identically. In the Library mode, go to the image and go to /Metadata/Read Metadata From File...

http://galleries.stevemelvin.com/Primary%201-1000sec.xmp


----------



## jrista (Feb 25, 2013)

Stephen Melvin said:



> Here's my work with the primary, using Adobe Lightroom. It took about five minutes:



That looks pretty freakin awesome for 102400!


----------



## emag (Feb 25, 2013)

Anyone with a similar shot using 6D?


----------



## Jeremy (Feb 25, 2013)

Does anyone else find it funny that on a photography discussion board we're posting cat pics just like everyone on Facebook?


----------



## RS2021 (Feb 25, 2013)

Jeremy said:


> Does anyone else find it funny that on a photography discussion board we're posting cat pics just like everyone on Facebook?



LOL. To test mundane stuff, they are excellent subjects: plenty of detail with whiskers etc, tonal if not color contrast. 

And as models go, they are convenient and easy to find in a pinch... ubiquitous as the most common household pet in America. Easy to book a session, no need to sign releases, generally cooperative, and no need to pay them! What's not to love!! 

As for the photography forum, setting the 'model' aside, the simple shot addresses high ISO/low light aspects of 5D3. Personally for me, the top left corner, pitch black in real life, was the key. It is clear much can be done with the interrelated banding/noise/color/DR issues in these rather extreme settings and 5D3 is fairly competent when pushed.


----------



## pedro (Feb 25, 2013)

Stephen Melvin said:


> Ray2021 said:
> 
> 
> > Just uploaded the CR2 raw files to skydrive, hope this works:
> ...



Oh yes it does really look great...time to go LR for me. I did everything in DPP until now...That is quite a great RAW converter and denoise software as I can see.


----------



## jabbott (Feb 25, 2013)

It appears that your 5D3 has the same issue that mine does... in the far bottom right corner of the image it has a more purple hue than it should. It is more noticeable in your NR 25 image. On my 5D3 it is most noticeable at ISO 12,800 and above, but sometimes at ISO 6,400.


----------



## RS2021 (Feb 25, 2013)

jabbott said:


> It appears that your 5D3 has the same issue that mine does... in the far bottom right corner of the image it has a more purple hue than it should. It is more noticeable in your NR 25 image. On my 5D3 it is most noticeable at ISO 12,800 and above, but sometimes at ISO 6,400.



Yes, I see it in both CR2 raw files I uploaded as well (taken moments apart), but it mostly is gone when LR opens it with default settings...but I hadn't noticed that before... 

Anyone else seeing these at very high ISO/low lighting?


----------



## Stephen Melvin (Feb 25, 2013)

pedro said:


> Oh yes it does really look great...time to go LR for me. I did everything in DPP until now...That is quite a great RAW converter and denoise software as I can see.



It is a great converter, but keep in mind that a lot of it has to do with the choices I made when converting the file. The default image that comes up in LR isn't going to look much different from what the original post showed. I did about four or five things to the image in LR's "Develop" module to bring out more from the image. It didn't take me long, because I'm experienced in the program, and have a solid photography and retouching background. You'll need to play around and experiment with whatever program you use to process your images.


----------



## RS2021 (Feb 25, 2013)

Stephen Melvin said:


> pedro said:
> 
> 
> > Oh yes it does really look great...time to go LR for me. I did everything in DPP until now...That is quite a great RAW converter and denoise software as I can see.
> ...



Stephen, thanks for sharing your settings earlier. It is really a nice professional balance between too much processing and none at all. 

@Pedro: the baseline version I posted was intentionally set to LR "zero" to show what one starts out with at this ISO. Refer/download Stephen's file for settings if you end up giving the LR4 free trial a go. I highly recommend the program.


----------



## pedro (Feb 25, 2013)

Stephen Melvin said:


> pedro said:
> 
> 
> > Oh yes it does really look great...time to go LR for me. I did everything in DPP until now...That is quite a great RAW converter and denoise software as I can see.
> ...





Stephen Melvin said:


> pedro said:
> 
> 
> > Oh yes it does really look great...time to go LR for me. I did everything in DPP until now...That is quite a great RAW converter and denoise software as I can see.





Ray2021 said:


> Stephen Melvin said:
> 
> 
> > pedro said:
> ...



*@Stephen, Ray:* Thank you so much for your replies. I will. Wanna try out what LR has in store. Saving up for a 16-35 at the time...So LR might be a next...Cheers to ya'll, Pedro


----------



## Stephen Melvin (Feb 26, 2013)

jabbott said:


> It appears that your 5D3 has the same issue that mine does... in the far bottom right corner of the image it has a more purple hue than it should. It is more noticeable in your NR 25 image. On my 5D3 it is most noticeable at ISO 12,800 and above, but sometimes at ISO 6,400.





Ray2021 said:


> Yes, I see it in both CR2 raw files I uploaded as well (taken moments apart), but it mostly is gone when LR opens it with default settings...but I hadn't noticed that before...
> 
> Anyone else seeing these at very high ISO/low lighting?



Yes, it's pretty common. I think Canon may be working on a firmware update to help with this.


----------



## TrumpetPower! (Feb 26, 2013)

Stephen Melvin said:


> jabbott said:
> 
> 
> > It appears that your 5D3 has the same issue that mine does... in the far bottom right corner of the image it has a more purple hue than it should. It is more noticeable in your NR 25 image. On my 5D3 it is most noticeable at ISO 12,800 and above, but sometimes at ISO 6,400.
> ...



There's actually a solution to that...avoid shooting moving subjects below EV -2 with a slow or long lens without a tripod, and you won't need to boost the ISO that high.

(EV -2 is much too dark to read, so it's not like this is a radical concept....)

b&


----------



## RS2021 (Feb 26, 2013)

TrumpetPower! said:


> There's actually a solution to that...avoid shooting moving subjects below EV -2 with a slow or long lens without a tripod, and you won't need to boost the ISO that high.
> 
> (EV -2 is much too dark to read, so it's not like this is a radical concept....)
> 
> b&



Doesn't explain the preferential corner noise ...again these are experimental shots and most of us including me are not keen on taking candle pics at 1/1000 sec and extended ISO except for sh*ts and giggles...but still....purple noise in just one corner is interesting. It is not pervasive across the frame.


----------



## skitron (Feb 26, 2013)

Here's the low light cat pic processed with Capture One Pro v7. Basically nothing but NR, local contrast, vignette and RGB curve. I used Stephen Melvin's nice render as an asthetic template and just messed with it (i.e. the original RAW) in CO to see if it could do the same thing...

[edit] BTW - Duplicating Stephen's chosen asthetic in CO was a nice exercise in terms of learning to embrace the chiaroscuro. If you're a chiaroscuro newb like me, I can say it's worth d/l'ing the RAW and playing with it in your editor...some nice lessons learned for future reference by playing with it. Also, nice shot by Ray2021 to learn the lesson with.


----------



## RGF (Feb 26, 2013)

Nice shot, considering. And congrats on getting the focus correct. My biggest high ISO challenge is autofocus in very dark shots.


----------



## Stephen Melvin (Feb 26, 2013)

TrumpetPower! said:


> There's actually a solution to that...avoid shooting moving subjects below EV -2 with a slow or long lens without a tripod, and you won't need to boost the ISO that high.
> 
> (EV -2 is much too dark to read, so it's not like this is a radical concept....)
> 
> b&



Did you see the first image I posted? Lit by a distant streetlight, the only way to possibly take the shot was by boosting the ISO that high. I shot it with a short, fast lens, too. 

These high ISO's have opened up a world of possibility for me. I've been shooting in the dark for a long time. My favorite film, after Tri-X, is T-Max p3200. I've pushed that to ISO 50000. The Mk III outperforms the T-Max.



Stephen Melvin said:


> Here's one I did when experimenting the camera when I first bought it. 24mm, 1/25, f/1.4, ISO 102000. All processing done with Lightroom. The light sources is from a street light about 150 feet outside the house. I could barely see her. The AF assist lamp from my 580EX solved the focus issue.


----------



## RS2021 (Feb 26, 2013)

skitron said:


> Here's the low light cat pic processed with Capture One Pro v7. Basically nothing but NR, local contrast, vignette and RGB curve. I used Stephen Melvin's nice render as an asthetic template and just messed with it (i.e. the original RAW) in CO to see if it could do the same thing...



Skitron, CaptureOne also does well... Do I see a thin veil of green snow in dark parts not seen in the LR versions some of us posted? look at the middle of the frame on and above the dark torso. 

Obviously user setting could result in different rendering...but it may also be the nuances of different programs.


----------



## RS2021 (Feb 26, 2013)

RGF said:


> Nice shot, considering. And congrats on getting the focus correct. My biggest high ISO challenge is autofocus in very dark shots.



Thanks...yes the AF was not locking very fast and my eyes weren't that good in the dark to intervene with FTM.


----------



## skitron (Feb 26, 2013)

Ray2021 said:


> skitron said:
> 
> 
> > Here's the low light cat pic processed with Capture One Pro v7. Basically nothing but NR, local contrast, vignette and RGB curve. I used Stephen Melvin's nice render as an asthetic template and just messed with it (i.e. the original RAW) in CO to see if it could do the same thing...
> ...



Yes, I see a bit of green in the CO and a bit stronger blue in the LR. I'm sure one could mess with them to make them identical, but my exercise was first to see if CO would do what Stephen did in LR, and the answer for me is yes. Then the exercise for me turned to learning to embrace the chiaroscuro, and I learned alot about that from your nice shot and Stephen's nice render. So thanks to both of you for the inadvertent lesson for me!

[edit] And I'm pleased as can be to know that I can shoot at this ridiculous ISO setting and there are at least two editors, probably more, that can deal with it to at least some useful degree. Pretty amazing tech.


----------



## Stephen Melvin (Feb 27, 2013)

skitron said:


> Yes, I see a bit of green in the CO and a bit stronger blue in the LR. I'm sure one could mess with them to make them identical, but my exercise was first to see if CO would do what Stephen did in LR, and the answer for me is yes. Then the exercise for me turned to learning to embrace the chiaroscuro, and I learned alot about that from your nice shot and Stephen's nice render. So thanks to both of you for the inadvertent lesson for me!



You're welcome. The rendering of the colors is affected by so many variables, even within a single program. In LR, I selected the "Camera Standard" profile, which is designed to mimic Canon's standard color rendering. I also used the "adjustment brush" to get rid of some of the blue speckles in certain areas of the image. It didn't take long.




skitron said:


> [edit] And I'm pleased as can be to know that I can shoot at this ridiculous ISO setting and there are at least two editors, probably more, that can deal with it to at least some useful degree. Pretty amazing tech.



It truly is a dream come true for me. I now find myself looking for more ridiculous light to shoot in, and it's very hard to find a situation that I can't make something out of.

Here's a larger render of my adjustments:
http://galleries.stevemelvin.com/primary.jpg


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 27, 2013)

So what... I have a four year old Olympus E-520 that can take pictures that grainy at only ISO1600 

Seriously though.... 6 stops higher and less noise.... WOW! This is a huge difference.... ISO800 was unusable on the E-520, we have come a long way.


----------



## RS2021 (Feb 28, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> So what... I have a four year old Olympus E-520 that can take pictures that grainy at only ISO1600



;D ;D


----------



## CarlTN (Feb 28, 2013)

If I had been the original poster, I think a bunch of you would have piled on me and told me "that's not acceptable for web viewing, it's not worthy" !!!

Wouldn't it have been better to just leave the camera at the highest native ISO and underexposed it? I got told that a lot too...yet I didn't see where any of you said that. I admit I didn't read every post.


----------



## RS2021 (Feb 28, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> If I had been the original poster, I think a bunch of you would have piled on me and told me "that's not acceptable for web viewing, it's not worthy" !!!
> 
> Wouldn't it have been better to just leave the camera at the highest native ISO and underexposed it? I got told that a lot too...yet I didn't see where any of you said that. I admit I didn't read every post.



I clearly stated in the original post that it was an experimental shot that was specifically designed to play with highest extended ISO capture. I did my best to control the light, shared with everyone the basic setup and export parameters, and also uploaded the CR2 raw files so the community can chime in. When programs and tweaks were suggested, it was pursued with an open mind. Many of us repeatedly acknowledged it was experimental and a learning tool. And, speaking for myself, I really learned from others in this process. 

Isn't that one of the useful purposes of a community such as ours?


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 28, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> If I had been the original poster, I think a bunch of you would have piled on me and told me "that's not acceptable for web viewing, it's not worthy" !!!



If you were the original poster, we would have accused you of stealing Ray's cat


----------



## CarlTN (Feb 28, 2013)

Ray2021 said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > If I had been the original poster, I think a bunch of you would have piled on me and told me "that's not acceptable for web viewing, it's not worthy" !!!
> ...



No need to get defensive, my question wasn't directed at you, but rather the people who like to critique. I never thought it was anything other than an experiment, and I read that part...just saying sometimes it seems like criticism isn't always as productive as it could be, or as egalitarian. I don't disagree with most everything suggested, and I am trying to learn also...which is why I asked my second question. Sorry if I shouldn't have posted what I did.



Don Haines said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > If I had been the original poster, I think a bunch of you would have piled on me and told me "that's not acceptable for web viewing, it's not worthy" !!!
> ...



Haha, good point! No need, I have my own cat...and no, this is the opposite of the best picture I've shot of him...I may put some better ones in the thread about cat pictures.


----------



## RS2021 (Feb 28, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > If I had been the original poster, I think a bunch of you would have piled on me and told me "that's not acceptable for web viewing, it's not worthy" !!!
> ...



Lol...She is a Maine Coon. Like all New Englanders she will not be taken so easily. Oh fine, may be with a bit of deli turkey


----------



## CarlTN (Feb 28, 2013)

Mine is also a Mainecoon...or else a Siberian...I don't know...he seems to have the "M" on his forehead.


----------

