Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 26

Thread: Noise Problem

  1. #1
    Nicks Pics's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Michigan U.S.
    Posts
    1,132
    Real Name
    Nick

    Noise Problem

    Hi Everyone.

    I am using this Fujifilm Sl100 bridge camera, which is nice in a lot of ways, but the noise it produces is something interesting- if I may put it that way. According to the manufacturer's website it has a "1/2.3-inch CMOS with primary color filter" sensor.
    Here are the tech specs if you are interested. http://www.fujifilm.com/products/dig...pecifications/

    Usually it is preferable to process images from RAW, and in theory, you should be able to get the same out of the RAW image as the camera does, but between trying to apply needed sharpening, and needed noise reduction, it is a difficult enough situation that sometimes I find it easier to achieve a decent result starting with a Jpeg,

    Today I was shooting some muskrats, long- awaited type shots too but here is an example of a RAW image, imported to Lightroom, the automatic sharpening turned off, (so as not to enhance the noise) and exported to Jpeg. This is a crop from 100%. View at full size

    Noise Problem

    I think I had exposed this image fairly correctly, with ISO of only 1600. Where is all this grain coming from? It appears nearly uniform over light and dark areas of the image, which causes me to wonder if it is just ordinary noise. Sometimes I wonder how the in-camera processor even discerns as much from the RAW data when creating the Jpeg as it does. This is a crop of the Jpeg of the same image, imported and exported from lightroom with the automatic sharpening turned down to zero, with no other adjustments. The Jpeg quality was recorded at : fine, 8 out of the original 16 MP.

    Noise Problem


    As I mentioned, in theory you should be able to achieve at least as good results from the RAW image in software as the camera does from its in- camera processing, and I can usually make improvements to the tones, colors, etc. over what the camera would do, but the noise stumps me. When you start to sharpen the image this is what starts happening- because the noise is almost the only detail in the picture:

    Noise Problem

    I know you can try to balance sharpening and NR, but it is hard to get a decent result with this much noise. This image was just as an illustration of what happens.

    Now it was sprinkling when this image was taken, but I don't think the grainy pattern was really just rain drops. It occurs when not so rainy too, as in this image. Noise Problem

    Sorry for the long boring post It's not just meant to be a complaint against the camera, but I would like to know how to recover some of my images as best as I can, and I was wondering what you all thought of the noise problem from a technical perspective.

    Thanks in advance for any input!
    Nick

  2. #2
    Shadowman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    WNY
    Posts
    36,717
    Real Name
    John

    Re: Noise Problem

    Did you use digital zoom on this shot?

  3. #3
    Nicks Pics's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Michigan U.S.
    Posts
    1,132
    Real Name
    Nick

    Re: Noise Problem

    Did you use digital zoom on this shot?
    No, I don't use digital zoom almost ever. Thanks

  4. #4
    Stagecoach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Suva, Fiji
    Posts
    7,075
    Real Name
    Grahame

    Re: Noise Problem

    Are you undertaking noise reduction before sharpening ?

  5. #5
    Nicks Pics's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Michigan U.S.
    Posts
    1,132
    Real Name
    Nick

    Re: Noise Problem

    Are you undertaking noise reduction before sharpening ?
    Yes, indeed, I just meant to say it is hard to remove as much noise as my RAW images have and still preserve much detail. So as it usually turns out, they end up having an effect like illustrated in #3, which isn't really acceptable. I thought it might be helpful to give an example also of an image like this that I have edited. Noise Problem

    Even if you remove most of the noise, there is still some grain, which the noise filters avoid, thinking it is detail, and the sharpening filters sharpen thinking it is detail. So I get a result like this.

  6. #6
    Moderator Manfred M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    21,925
    Real Name
    Manfred Mueller

    Re: Noise Problem

    Nick - your camera has a tiny sensor (5.76mm x 4.29mm or 25 sq mm), which means it will be quite noisy, even at low ISO ratings. The camera manufacturers know this and implement extremely agressive noise reduction algorithms in the processing engine. This means your jpegs may look clean as compared to the RAW output, but this has been achieved smearing the pixels; so while you get low noise, you also get significantly reduced resolution in those jpegs.

    When I compare your sensor to the one in my small Panasonic GX7 (also an 16MP camera), which has a 17.3mm x 13mm - 225 sq mm sensor which is 9 times larger than yours. I find it can noisy even at 800 ISO, and with that tiny sensor with roughly the same pixel count, it is going to be super noisy (small pixels capture less light and therefore have higher noise levels) even before you enlarge the image. That is the price of cramming the same number of pixels into a space that is 9 times smaller...

    What you are reporting is a well known issue with these small sensor cameras, and is probably the main reason people will buy units with larger sensors. The specs have been designed to look impressive, but unfortuantely, this really does not result in superior performance. If you want to get rid of the noise, you are going to have to accept that you will have to do the same thing as the camera's processing engine and be super agrgessive when you apply noise reduction, understanding you will be sacrificing resolution in doing this.

  7. #7
    Nicks Pics's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Michigan U.S.
    Posts
    1,132
    Real Name
    Nick

    Re: Noise Problem

    Thanks for the great response. What would be your recommended method for removing noise without sacrificing detail? Or at least, as little as possible? And making it so that sharpening can be safely applied afterwards without enhancing the noise?

  8. #8
    Moderator Manfred M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    21,925
    Real Name
    Manfred Mueller

    Re: Noise Problem

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicks Pics View Post
    Thanks for the great response. What would be your recommended method for removing noise without sacrificing detail? Or at least, as little as possible? And making it so that sharpening can be safely applied afterwards without enhancing the noise?
    The only solution I found was moving to a larger sensor camera. That's essentially how I ended up getting my first DSLR; I hit the limit of what I could do with a bridge camera and it more than anything else was limiting my ability to get the shots I wanted (and knew I could get).

    I didn't spend all that money on new gear just because I had some "extra money" lying around. I suspect that is probably true for most photographers.


    Just to add another note; I went to a full-frame Nikon D800 a couple of years after I got my D90. Effectively the same reason, I was hitting the limits of what the D90 (at the time high end consumer camera) could do and was missing shots I knew I should have gotten (or couldn't get due to camera limitations). At this point, (three years later) I have not hit the wall with the shooting I am doing with it and my success rate (shots I am happy with from a composition and technical standpoint (sharpness), DoF, etc.) is where it should be.
    Last edited by Manfred M; 17th December 2014 at 06:10 AM.

  9. #9
    ashcroft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    UK, West Wales
    Posts
    314
    Real Name
    rob ashcroft

    Re: Noise Problem

    I agree with Manfred. If you look at the chart below you can see the relative differences. Your sensor is the penultimate one at the bottom (6.17x4.55mm). Compare that to a full-frame sensor (the top left). The full-frame is 30 times larger than your sensor, and a normal APS-C sensor (most DSLRs) is 12 times larger than yours. All three sensors in different cameras could have 16MP.

    Even my Panasonic G6 (four-thirds camera) has a sensor 17x13mm is 8 times the size of the Fujifilm SL1000. My Canon 5DM2 (FF) is 30 times, as I said above. The pixel rate is also important. I used to have a 5D Mark 1, also FF, but only 12MP compared to the current 21MP. I still think it took better quality images than my current 5DM2.

    The technology has improved to allow more efficiency in collecting light at pixel sites, but there are limits to the MP level that you can cram into a physical size.

    I think larger, full-frame sensors have to be the way to go in future. And don't forget that FF is itself not all that large. In the film days it was seen as the lesser option compared to other film formats. The FF format in film was developed for the mass market from the 1920s.

    Source: images.gizmag.com
    Noise Problem
    Last edited by ashcroft; 17th December 2014 at 05:08 AM. Reason: typos

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Mumbai, India
    Posts
    184
    Real Name
    Mrinmoy

    Re: Noise Problem

    Hi Nick,

    First of all 1600 is not a less amount of ISO sensitivity even for a DSLR with 1.5/1.6 crop factor. Yours is a very small sensor compared to that. Camera with similar sensor size which I have used is Nikon L820 which performs best till 400 ISO and usable images at 100% till 800 ISO. Anything beyond that is simply not usable when viewed at 100%.

    Also just to let you know, (you might be knowing that). It is not the way camera vendors advertise the camera's light sensitivity. "Our camera works till 6400 ISO or something like that.."

    Moment you increase the ISO from the least value available in your camera you start loosing the tonal range and increasing the noise, no matter how much less value you are selecting or how much high value is available in your camera.

    Always try to stick to least value available, it is better to get a slightly under exposed image rather than increasing the ISO to expose it properly.

  11. #11
    Moderator Manfred M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    21,925
    Real Name
    Manfred Mueller

    Re: Noise Problem

    Quote Originally Posted by mrinmoyvk View Post
    Always try to stick to least value available, it is better to get a slightly under exposed image rather than increasing the ISO to expose it properly.
    Actually this statement is not quite true. An "underexposed image" at a lower ISO is generally going to be noiser than a properly exposed one at a higher ISO.

  12. #12

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Mumbai, India
    Posts
    184
    Real Name
    Mrinmoy

    Re: Noise Problem

    Quote Originally Posted by GrumpyDiver View Post
    Actually this statement is not quite true. An "underexposed image" at a lower ISO is generally going to be noiser than a properly exposed one at a higher ISO.
    Might be but I prefer increasing the exposure of raw file in PS than to increase the ISO beyond what I feel comfortable.
    Generally I found images with increased exposure in PP to be less noisier than those with increased ISO. I agree that other post processing settings are also applied on the file to reduce noise. Although never compared two images with different settings side by side.

  13. #13
    Nicks Pics's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Michigan U.S.
    Posts
    1,132
    Real Name
    Nick

    Re: Noise Problem

    Thanks for the comments Ashcroft, Mrinmoy, and Manfred,

    I appreciate your explanations, perhaps I should not expect super quality images with it especially in low light.

  14. #14
    Moderator Manfred M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    21,925
    Real Name
    Manfred Mueller

    Re: Noise Problem

    Quote Originally Posted by mrinmoyvk View Post
    Might be but I prefer increasing the exposure of raw file in PS than to increase the ISO beyond what I feel comfortable.
    Generally I found images with increased exposure in PP to be less noisier than those with increased ISO. I agree that other post processing settings are also applied on the file to reduce noise. Although never compared two images with different settings side by side.

    Sorry, but what you suggest does add up.

    While sensor noise more or less evenly distributed, it is more apparent in the darker colours than in the lighter ones, so if you you are underexposing, you will be biasing the image towards the darker tones (close to "0" values for black), i.e. the area of the data that is more susceptible to noise. There will be more noise in the base image.

    As you increase ISO, you are increasing the gain (amplification) and so amplifying both the "good" data, as well as any system noise (sensor noise and leakage current being the two main contributing factors), but you are pushing the exposure into the range where noise has less impact on the final image, so a properly exposed image inherently has a lower noise component.

    When you remove the noise in post-processing, you are effectively blending pixels together, so if you are seeing less noise through your work flow, you are doing so through an agressive noise reduction setting, which will also affect your image quality, i.e. blurring. Your resolution will go down.

    In my (and other experienced photographers experience) it is better to expose correctly as the base image will have less noise and a sharper image. As an example, here is a properly exposed image taken with my mFT sensor GX7 I posted yesterday, which is know for okay, but not great higher ISO performance. It was taken at ISO 12800 and I did a bit of noise reduction on it. It is a fairly usable image. Experience tells me had I followed your workflow, this image would be far less sharp.

    Two young women from the wrong side of the tracks - Jaipur
    .
    Last edited by Dave Humphries; 17th December 2014 at 07:47 PM. Reason: Made link more obvious

  15. #15
    inkista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,502
    Real Name
    Kathy

    Re: Noise Problem

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicks Pics View Post
    ... perhaps I should not expect super quality images with it especially in low light.
    Yup. Low light is a big ask even for the larger sensors.

    I took this shot with a Canon 50D (APS-C sensor, 15MP) with the EF 400mm f/5.6L USM at iso 3200. The noise is pretty evident even after post-processing (but I tend to favor detail over noise). Low light and underexposure without noise is a tough tough ask. But since I didn't have to crop, it's a least relatively detailed.

    Noise Problem

  16. #16
    Nicks Pics's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Michigan U.S.
    Posts
    1,132
    Real Name
    Nick

    Re: Noise Problem

    Thanks Folks. I was going on the method of trying to expose correctly, dropping the shutter speed first, as that I find to be the cleanest, and also one of the most effective ways to raise exposure, I used 1/100 in one or both of the above muskrats, even though it was at 1200 equiv. mm, then I raise ISO, and of course start with as low an aperture as possible at a long telephoto length like that, ( usually at least, when shooing wildlife). I can reduce color noise pretty easily, with Lightroom, but the grain really gets my images. Oh well, I guess I'll have to just work on my noise reduction techniques in post, or use the Jpeg.s.

  17. #17
    Moderator Manfred M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    21,925
    Real Name
    Manfred Mueller

    Re: Noise Problem

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicks Pics View Post
    Thanks Folks. I was going on the method of trying to expose correctly, dropping the shutter speed first, as that I find to be the cleanest, and also one of the most effective ways to raise exposure, I used 1/100 in one or both of the above muskrats, even though it was at 1200 equiv. mm, then I raise ISO, and of course start with as low an aperture as possible at a long telephoto length like that, ( usually at least, when shooing wildlife). I can reduce color noise pretty easily, with Lightroom, but the grain really gets my images. Oh well, I guess I'll have to just work on my noise reduction techniques in post, or use the Jpeg.s.
    Nick at 1200mm equivilent, unless you are shooting on a tripod, 1/100th is going to be challanging, both compositionally (framing) and technically (a blur-free shot). Your small sensor means you are going to get pretty decent DoF; I would go for as high a shutter speed as you can and shoot wide open.

  18. #18
    Moderator Dave Humphries's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Windsor, Berks, UK
    Posts
    16,737
    Real Name
    Dave Humphries :)

    Re: Noise Problem

    Hi Nick,

    In my experience, something like Neat Image is better at preserving detail and reducing noise than the (even recently improved) algrithms in LR/ACR.

    Got to be worth a free trial - see how you get on - my thread linked above shows how easy it can be to use.

    Disclosure: I am simply a paying (happy) customer of their product.

    I think I started using Neat Image when I was a bridge camera shooter too, but still use it on my DX cameras when iso gets stretched and I have to crop in PP just to see the subject.
    That said, Manfred has a point; one of the reasons I sprung for a DSLR was to improve IQ, the bridge camera was fairly naff beyond 800 iso even with NR, especially in low light, your shots look awfully 'familiar'!

    The sad fact is that good light on the subject, your proximity to it and photographic skill - are all paramount to getting good images, from any camera.

    Upgrading the camera alone won't help, especially if you do what I did and then attempt to shoot subjects that are even further away and/or less well lit - because; surprise, surprise, the result is images that look just as bad.

    The practical bottom line; don't expect to achieve the impossible (with ANY camera).
    Unfortunately, like many before you (myself included), these shots are just that. - although I appreciate they are 100% crops for illustrative purposes, not finished photographs.

    The "great" wildlife shots we see here at CiC are from those that have learnt this lesson and addressed it; Joe, Dan, et al.
    Personally, it is something I'm still struggling to deal with, so my shots are still 'so-so'.
    Last edited by Dave Humphries; 17th December 2014 at 08:12 PM.

  19. #19

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Cambridge, UK
    Posts
    492
    Real Name
    Peter

    Re: Noise Problem

    Is this the camera?
    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilms100fs/

    If so, I have one too but know that higher ISO does pose a challenge with regard to noise.

    Can you upload a raw or two?

  20. #20
    Nicks Pics's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Michigan U.S.
    Posts
    1,132
    Real Name
    Nick

    Re: Noise Problem

    Is this the camera?
    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilms100fs/

    If so, I have one too but know that higher ISO does pose a challenge with regard to noise.

    Can you upload a raw or two?
    That looks something like a nifty camera there, but It is not exactly the same, I have SL1000, it is 100SF. I can't really upload a RAW here, this website isn't equipped to accept that format, but the first image in this post, above, is converted to Jpeg, with the intent of showing what the RAW looks like, and it's a pretty good representation.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •