Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-28-2011, 06:16 AM   #16
Forum Member
G-Diesel's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Leiria - Portugal
Posts: 65
I have used Neat Image and it really fits me better than Topaz Denoise. Topaz makes some imperfections (like skin imperfections) look like an oil painting most of the times when I use it (I can't find a better way to describe that fact).
You will still have to create layers and edit a bit here and there if you don't want the noise reduction to make the picture look too artificial, but it's great when you can fix an extra-high-ISO photo like this one.

11-28-2011, 11:50 AM   #17
Pentaxian
JohnBee's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: front of computer
Posts: 4,496
QuoteOriginally posted by G-Diesel Quote
...Topaz makes some imperfections (like skin imperfections) look like an oil painting most of the times when I use it (I can't find a better way to describe that fact)...
I think I know what you're talking about. And this is usually caused by overprocessing: ie. detail recovery or blur reduction as show bellow:



However the good news is that this is a result of overprocessing and that it can be averted. For example, here is a sample of what Topaz Denoise can with an ISO6400 image from RAW:



And if you look at the full size image here and pixel peep, you can see the overall output quality of the TDN. - NB. the image is softened from portrait filter.

Having said that, based on years of use NR software use(Noise Ninja and Noiseware Pro), I've come to the conclusion that Topaz Denoise remains as the software to beat in terms of noise reduction at this time. However it took a considerable amount of time time to get familiar with the way the software worked and I think this was the biggest drawback with the technology for those of us coming from the traditional NR solutions such as Noise Ninja and Noiseware.

Hope this helps.
11-30-2011, 01:01 AM   #18
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 893
Two things to say

1. ISO 25600 is really pushing the limits here. Why do you need to take photos with 1/500 @ f/8 in total darkness. Why do you others take portrait shots at ISO 6400.
2. Results look quite good after some processing.
11-30-2011, 06:51 AM   #19
Junior Member




Join Date: Mar 2011
Photos: Albums
Posts: 39
Original Poster
Hi zapp,

Well of course I don't need to take photos in total darkness and this was certainly not taken in total darkness at all, in fact it was early evening. If you read my initial post again you'll see that I let the ISO rise as an experiment to see what the K5 could do.

Also the 80-320 needs F8 to be sharp and I need 1/500 to be able to hand hold it and have a reasonable chance of a sharp photo, TAV wanted ISO25600 to meet these requirements and I'm more than happy with the result, especially after seeing what some of our fellow forum members did to improve on my efforts.

For me these are valid reasons to make use of the possibilities this great camera offers.

Graham

11-30-2011, 07:19 AM   #20
Pentaxian
JohnBee's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: front of computer
Posts: 4,496
QuoteOriginally posted by zapp Quote
1. ISO 25600 is really pushing the limits here. Why do you need to take photos with 1/500 @ f/8 in total darkness. Why do you others take portrait shots at ISO 6400.
2. Results look quite good after some processing.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and "assume" that by you others, you are referring to the image I posted?

And, in the event that I didn't make an ass out of myself, then I'd say that the biggest reason for shooting high ISO portraits is due to indoor shooting. For example... in the case, the posted image was a snapshot(candid) taken of my son while he was playing in the bedroom. And what's more interesting is that a faster shutter(1/250) would have likely been better suited to capture an image like this(movement and shutter blur etc). And so, in reality... I could have have benefited from am even higher sensitivity had the camera been capable of providing it. However, my personal preference is usually at/or around 6400 and so that's what I work with in most cases.

Having said that, I should also mention that though the possibility of faster glass exists, I tend to shoot my candids in a 3/4 DOF zone, which usually tops out at or around f/3.2 onward(depending on focal length and working distance). Otherwise... I end-up with very thin DOF which just isn't very practical.

Hope this helps.

Last edited by JohnBee; 12-02-2011 at 09:43 PM.
12-02-2011, 06:27 PM   #21
Veteran Member
Raybo's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 871
Cute kid John!
12-02-2011, 06:35 PM   #22
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Flushing NY
Photos: Albums
Posts: 409
Maybe I'm just very noise tolerant, but I think the original image looks great. Just removing the color noise in Lightroom would have done the trick for me with that one, I think. And maybe a little sharpening -- but the version done in Topaz looks excruciatingly over-sharpened to me. (The poor guy's head looks like he was scratched with razor blades... )
12-02-2011, 06:47 PM   #23
Veteran Member
Raybo's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 871
QuoteOriginally posted by pentup Quote
Maybe I'm just very noise tolerant, but I think the original image looks great. Just removing the color noise in Lightroom would have done the trick for me with that one, I think. And maybe a little sharpening -- but the version done in Topaz looks excruciatingly over-sharpened to me. (The poor guy's head looks like he was scratched with razor blades... )

I agree.

It looks kinda "cut and paste".

12-02-2011, 06:56 PM   #24
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Flushing NY
Photos: Albums
Posts: 409
Here's my take on it, for what it's worth, via Lightroom. As I say, I'm noise tolerant -- especially in the OOF areas. I quite like the luminance noise here. (Chroma noise is always an unmitigated evil, though)
Sometimes I think a slight bump up with the clarity slider is preferable to sharpening, though I did a little of both.

Name:  basketball.jpg
Views: 333
Size:  249.6 KB
12-02-2011, 07:08 PM   #25
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Flushing NY
Photos: Albums
Posts: 409
By the way, what's he playing? Some giant drum? Looks like he's really exerting himself! Nice shot.
Amazing what you can do with a K-5.
12-02-2011, 10:04 PM   #26
Veteran Member
Don From The Radio's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Delaware
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 344


3 years ago, that photo wouldn't have been possible with some cameras at ISO 1600 (Nikon D40 comes to mind). It's amazing that it's 25600 and looks that good with just a tiny bit of work. The K-5 really is an amazing tool.
12-02-2011, 10:53 PM   #27
Veteran Member
Raybo's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 871
QuoteOriginally posted by pentup Quote
By the way, what's he playing? Some giant drum? Looks like he's really exerting himself! Nice shot.
Amazing what you can do with a K-5.
Weight lifter?
12-02-2011, 11:17 PM   #28
Junior Member




Join Date: Mar 2011
Photos: Albums
Posts: 39
Original Poster
As I wrote in my first post he's playing a snare drum, the guy behind him is playing a floor tom tom on a harness. They really put some effort into their playing and were very loud. Not an easy job in the high humidity here in Singapore. The band was called Urban Drum Crew and they were brilliant.

I really like your take on it pent up and like your LR ideas, too.

Graham
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, dslr, fa, iso, k-5, k-5 ii, k-5 iis, k5, noise, pentax k-5, photo
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
80-320 FA on a K5 Suitability ukwoody Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 11-03-2011 07:28 PM
Image quality drop from ISO 12800 to 25600 on K-5 Adam Pentax K-5 12 11-21-2010 03:30 PM
Pentax K-r Samples.....inc 25600 Steelski Pentax News and Rumors 8 09-17-2010 07:17 PM
ISO 25600 is for chumps - Some Neato emerging technology bigben91682 General Talk 2 10-13-2008 09:45 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:10 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top