# Problems with Noise in Dark Areas



## bjd (Oct 14, 2012)

Hi,
I have read a bit about this problem, but dont really understand why it is happening in some cases. Take the picture below (just a part of it).
That was created from 3 RAW files at -1.5, -0.5 and +0.5EV. Its the red pixel noise in the tree that is disturbing. None of the original pictures has that noise. In fact the tree was one of the darkest parts so I expected the information for that part of the picture to be taken from one of the more exposed shots, and
therefore have very low noise.
I processed the HDR in Photomatix. I have not been able to get rid of the noise in PS so I need to make sure it is not created in the HDR process.
Does anyone have any tips how to avoid this problem? 
Cheers Brian


----------



## Kernuak (Oct 14, 2012)

One of the side effects of HDR, is that the processing can add noise, as it is pushing the exposure in some areas. It is particualrly noticeable if you shoot a silhouette. To be honest, I don't really see the need for HDR when shooting a silhouette, as you would normally just expose for the background and leave the foreground completely blocked out. Also, with such large contrast differences in the transition areas, HDR results in unsightly haloes.


----------



## bjd (Oct 14, 2012)

Kernuak said:


> One of the side effects of HDR, is that the processing can add noise, as it is pushing the exposure in some areas. It is particualrly noticeable if you shoot a silhouette. To be honest, I don't really see the need for HDR when shooting a silhouette, as you would normally just expose for the background and leave the foreground completely blocked out. Also, with such large contrast differences in the transition areas, HDR results in unsightly haloes.


You know, posts like that "usually" upset me, as in "dont do what you are trying to do"! 
But I took your advice and from a single shot I managed to achieve what I wanted without any HDR at all,
just with the normal tools in Lightroom. So obviously I'm not upset. 
And here's the result. Biggest difference is the almost complete lack of noise and Halo around the tree.
I had 5 bracketed shots so basically went the HDR route without trying alternatives first. 
Thanks very much for the idea.

CHeers Brian


----------



## Kernuak (Oct 14, 2012)

bjd said:


> Kernuak said:
> 
> 
> > One of the side effects of HDR, is that the processing can add noise, as it is pushing the exposure in some areas. It is particualrly noticeable if you shoot a silhouette. To be honest, I don't really see the need for HDR when shooting a silhouette, as you would normally just expose for the background and leave the foreground completely blocked out. Also, with such large contrast differences in the transition areas, HDR results in unsightly haloes.
> ...


"Usually", because most of the stuff on the web with high contrast transition areas is that way and Photomatix is probably the worst offender. Granted, there are people that can process in such a way that they can often be avoided, but they certainly seem to be in the minority and it takes painstaking work and/or practice. Those that have perfected the processing over long periods of practice can probably achieve the processing quite quickly in individual images. In this case, as you see, HDR wasn't needed and that is the biggest problem with HDR. I suppose it is like many things in vogue, they are often overused to the point that even sensible people start to think it's the only way. HDR is a useful tool, like anything else, but I would urge people to try other alternatives first, it gives much more natural results and avoids the risk of adding in unwanted elements that you can get, if not careful, when you do any sort of large scale processing. Sometimes heavy processing is wanted for a certain look, as it can be very dramatic, but it depends on the look you are after and haloes never look good, even on an intended heavily processed look.
I'm glad my comments helped, insuating you didn't know what you were doing wasn't intentional and having seen a lot of HDR on the web that is painful to look at, I'm a bit sensitive about HDR being used unnecessarily. Btw, it looks much better now.


----------



## bjd (Oct 14, 2012)

>>insuating you didn't know what you were doing wasn't intentional

I didn't understand it that way. No Problems.

Yes I think it does look far better too.


----------



## wsheldon (Oct 14, 2012)

Issues of HDR aside, I really love the "mood" of your final image. Very nice. The experience you relate here is a great reminder of why shooting multiple exposures and trying different techniques in post is so powerful. You may have started out to use HDR for a challenging exposure situation but had the raw images to go another way in response to feedback. Thanks for sharing.


----------



## blaydese (Oct 15, 2012)

Agree, great job once you found 
the problem and worked it out.

I agree, I too have spent almost 30 min working 
on one picture, then BAM, I just stop and take a break. 
Come back and use a preset or two and TADA 
picture looks great!

Good luck in the future, stick with it and enjoy your hobby, 
I too find it better when I just take my time.

Great picture by the way, really like the green patch.

Peace! 8)


----------



## bjd (Oct 16, 2012)

wsheldon said:


> Issues of HDR aside, I really love the "mood" of your final image. Very nice. The experience you relate here is a great reminder of why shooting multiple exposures and trying different techniques in post is so powerful. You may have started out to use HDR for a challenging exposure situation but had the raw images to go another way in response to feedback. Thanks for sharing.


Thanks. Here's another one that turned out good (IMHO) without HDR. 
On here it looks far too dark though, this is still nothing like what it looks like under LR on my monitor.

I hope I don't get banned from this Forum because of this..(I Mean posting non-HDR shots in a HDR Forum).... :-\


Anyway, I'll still be stuck with the noise problem next time I try HDR.


----------



## blaydese (Oct 17, 2012)

bjd said:


> I hope I don't get banned from this Forum because of this..(I Mean posting non-HDR shots in a HDR Forum).... :-\
> 
> 
> Anyway, I'll still be stuck with the noise problem next time I try HDR.



Oh, that's done it now, we'll pull your finger nails out 
and soak your hands in hot sauce! How dare you post 
non HDR shots! ... Ha ha Just kidding ! Nice picture, 
I don't think it's dark at all, imagine that shot blown 
up to 24" X 36 and framed, it'd be simply epic.

There is nothing wrong with dark if that is the mood of 
the picture.

Dark picture of a clown at a circus, is not cool. ???
clown are bright and cheery, well unless you are going for 
something sinister. 


Keep working on the HDR, it'll come around, 
we're all still learing, and reember it's supposed 
to be..... FUN! ;D

Peace! 8)


----------



## bjd (Oct 17, 2012)

OK, well maybe its not too dark, maybe the dynamic range isn't large enough.
Hmm I'll have a look at ways to increase the DR I think.

>>FUN! ;D

Now you tell me!


----------



## bvukich (Oct 17, 2012)

bjd said:


> I hope I don't get banned from this Forum because of this..(I Mean posting non-HDR shots in a HDR Forum).... :-\



Oh boy... let me go grab the ban-hammer...

;D


----------



## sublime LightWorks (Oct 17, 2012)

In a web course on Kelby, Matt discusses the noise issue. It stems from not shooting the upper exposures (overexposed) images high enough to get all the detail in the shadows. That becomes noise in the HDR resulting image. He illustrates this in a few examples.

By exposing on the high end (overexposed) enough to move the histogram off the left edge completely, you insure that you got all the shadow detail and thus reduce any noise in the HDR by a great margin. 

You might want to give this try. There was also a recent webinar on the Topaz site on reducing and controlling noise in HDR photos.


----------



## preppyak (Oct 17, 2012)

bjd said:


> But I took your advice and from a single shot I managed to achieve what I wanted without any HDR at all,
> just with the normal tools in Lightroom. So obviously I'm not upset.
> 
> And here's the result. Biggest difference is the almost complete lack of noise and Halo around the tree.


Nice shot.

I tend to find I do the same thing...I'll bracket 5 shots, try the HDR, and end up with too much noise or just not a nice blend, so I'll go back use just a single exposure in PS or Photomatix, and I tend to like the results much more. It also results in a much more natural image; if that tree in the foreground was brighter, it would make it look fake, since my mind knows it can't be that bright in the shadows.


----------



## wickidwombat (Oct 18, 2012)

topaz denoise works really well since you can control different levels of noise reduction for shadows highlights and colours try out the 30 day free trial and see what you think


----------



## bjd (Oct 21, 2012)

wickidwombat said:


> topaz denoise works really well since you can control different levels of noise reduction for shadows highlights and colours try out the 30 day free trial and see what you think


Hi,
thanks for the tip, seems like they are having a sale at the moment, 30% off I think.

Up till now I am not too impressed with the results. In my experience, too much loss of sharpness coupled to the noise reduction. But that is at 100% crop, maybe I am expecting too much at that level and I just need to look at the end results at normal viewing distance.
I'm going to take a look for some tutorials too.

Cheers Brian


----------



## @!ex (Nov 16, 2012)

HDR is best when it is used to achieve dynamic range the is IMPOSSIBLE with a single exposure, not just as an effect or detail enhancer. Here is a shot I took a few weeks back that would literally be impossible without HDR or exposure fusion. It is 7 AEB at 3EV per step. Yes you heard that correctly, 18 EV spacing total. My eyes could see it this way, but with a single exposure my camera couldn't. HDR is as much an art as any other technique. Use it, don't abuse it.




Everything Peels... by @!ex, on Flickr


----------



## killswitch (Nov 16, 2012)

@!ex said:


> HDR is best when it is used to achieve dynamic range the is IMPOSSIBLE with a single exposure, not just as an effect or detail enhancer. Here is a shot I took a few weeks back that would literally be impossible without HDR or exposure fusion. It is 7 AEB at 3EV per step. Yes you heard that correctly, 18 EV spacing total. My eyes could see it this way, but with a single exposure my camera couldn't. HDR is as much an art as any other technique. Use it, don't abuse it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That's a beauty @!ex. Perfect use of HDR, keeping it as natural as possible.


----------



## whatta (Nov 16, 2012)

@!ex said:


> Here is a shot I took a few weeks back that would literally be impossible without HDR or exposure fusion. It is 7 AEB at 3EV per step. Yes you heard that correctly, 18 EV spacing total.



Great picture!

We are currently at 14 EV if I am not mistaken, so maybe in few years we are there in one shot :


----------



## Northstar (Nov 16, 2012)

@!ex said:


> HDR is best when it is used to achieve dynamic range the is IMPOSSIBLE with a single exposure, not just as an effect or detail enhancer. Here is a shot I took a few weeks back that would literally be impossible without HDR or exposure fusion. It is 7 AEB at 3EV per step. Yes you heard that correctly, 18 EV spacing total. My eyes could see it this way, but with a single exposure my camera couldn't. HDR is as much an art as any other technique. Use it, don't abuse it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Very nice shot.


----------



## Neutral (Nov 16, 2012)

@!ex said:


> ....
> HDR is as much an art as any other technique. Use it, don't abuse it.


Exactly, frequently we see just opposite


----------



## rpt (Nov 16, 2012)

@!ex said:


> HDR is best when it is used to achieve dynamic range the is IMPOSSIBLE with a single exposure, not just as an effect or detail enhancer. Here is a shot I took a few weeks back that would literally be impossible without HDR or exposure fusion. It is 7 AEB at 3EV per step. Yes you heard that correctly, 18 EV spacing total. My eyes could see it this way, but with a single exposure my camera couldn't. HDR is as much an art as any other technique. Use it, don't abuse it.
> 
> Everything Peels... by @!ex, on Flickr


Lovely picture.


----------



## @!ex (Nov 18, 2012)

whatta said:


> @!ex said:
> 
> 
> > Here is a shot I took a few weeks back that would literally be impossible without HDR or exposure fusion. It is 7 AEB at 3EV per step. Yes you heard that correctly, 18 EV spacing total.
> ...



Sort of true, because I am at 14 EV per shot with and 18 ev range on base exposure. It might be a bit before we get that far


----------



## @!ex (Nov 18, 2012)

Here is another shot from the same day and location as the one I posted above. Again, try getting this exposure in a single shot. One of the biggest improvements you can make with HDR shooting is thinking in high dynamic range before you shoot. 




End of the Road by @!ex, on Flickr


----------



## blaydese (Apr 4, 2013)

@!ex said:


> One of the biggest improvements you can make with HDR shooting is thinking in high dynamic range before you shoot.



That's what I'm doing now, thinking in color. 


Peace! 8)


----------

