k3 interval shooting = great noise reduction

Wayneheim · 11-02-2013, 10:41 PM

Just got my k3 tonight and was putting it threw some tests. I was trying some high iso tests and playing with the interval shooting. I found that if you shoot a single shot at 12800 and then compare it to a 12800 interval of 8 shots set to average, the noise reduction is incredible. Way better then using in camera noise reduction. Try it at 52,000 and results were even more amazing. Could pull a much cleaner image this way then trying to use in camera noise reduction or Lightroom noise reduction. The image does end up a hair softer though but that's at 200 zoom. Tried the test at 2000 iso and it works there too but Lightroom can easily handle that noise almost as well. But interval and Lightroom is a great combination.

Anyone else confirm tried this? I tried a 19 shot average but at some point the averaging doesn't improve it any more. I think it's somewhere between 6-9 shots seems to provide the best results. Attached is a 12,800 with some Lightroom sharpening and a bit of noise reduction.

Wayne

Attached Images

JohnBee · 11-02-2013, 10:48 PM

Looks good.
I seem to of read the same figures on the theoretical frame limit(8) for improvements.
Having said that, multi-frame noise reduction works very well, though I have yet to find a practical use for it against that of a slower shutter and lower ISO myself.

vonBaloney · 11-02-2013, 10:54 PM

Originally posted by JohnBee

Looks good.
I seem to of read the same figures on the theoretical frame limit(8) for improvements.
Having said that, multi-frame noise reduction works very well, though I have yet to find a practical use for it against that of a slower shutter and lower ISO myself.

Handheld night shots.

rawr · 11-02-2013, 11:03 PM

Originally posted by JohnBee

though I have yet to find a practical use for it against that of a slower shutter and lower ISO myself.

Sony has had a neat implementation of this for years. It works quite well on NEX and RX100 for static scenes at night or in poor lighting when you don't have a good tripod or monopod around. It can also broaden the dynamic range of an image considerably in any lighting. Downside is that it only creates JPEGs. I guess doing it in the K-3 does the same.

Adam · 11-02-2013, 11:08 PM

Originally posted by Wayneheim

Just got my k3 tonight and was putting it threw some tests. I was trying some high iso tests and playing with the interval shooting. I found that if you shoot a single shot at 12800 and then compare it to a 12800 interval of 8 shots set to average, the noise reduction is incredible. Way better then using in camera noise reduction. Try it at 52,000 and results were even more amazing. Could pull a much cleaner image this way then trying to use in camera noise reduction or Lightroom noise reduction. The image does end up a hair softer though but that's at 200 zoom. Tried the test at 2000 iso and it works there too but Lightroom can easily handle that noise almost as well. But interval and Lightroom is a great combination.

Anyone else confirm tried this? I tried a 19 shot average but at some point the averaging doesn't improve it any more. I think it's somewhere between 6-9 shots seems to provide the best results. Attached is a 12,800 with some Lightroom sharpening and a bit of noise reduction.

Wayne

Multi-frame NR is extremely effective. If you put it through a program like arcsoft you can virtually remove the noise completely!

tim60 · 11-02-2013, 11:22 PM

Originally posted by Wayneheim

Just got my k3 tonight and was putting it threw some tests. I was trying some high iso tests and playing with the interval shooting. I found that if you shoot a single shot at 12800 and then compare it to a 12800 interval of 8 shots set to average, the noise reduction is incredible. Way better then using in camera noise reduction. Try it at 52,000 and results were even more amazing. Could pull a much cleaner image this way then trying to use in camera noise reduction or Lightroom noise reduction. The image does end up a hair softer though but that's at 200 zoom. Tried the test at 2000 iso and it works there too but Lightroom can easily handle that noise almost as well. But interval and Lightroom is a great combination.

Anyone else confirm tried this? I tried a 19 shot average but at some point the averaging doesn't improve it any more. I think it's somewhere between 6-9 shots seems to provide the best results. Attached is a 12,800 with some Lightroom sharpening and a bit of noise reduction.

Wayne

I have not confirmed it but it seems consistent with the theory that noise is random, so averaging of several must reduce noise. The number of frames which makes sense would confront the problem of change of the image from frame to frame - either from camera movement or subject change. Analogs of this noise reduction method have been used in electronics for many decades. Interesting that the first place I encountered this was in a low noise amplifier for moving coil cartridges for playing vinyl records (remember them) - there were 8 transistors in parallel to cancel out the effect of noise in each. I never thought if there was a theoretical limit to the number which could be used or if it was just a practical 'diminishing returns' based limit to adding more - given that each additional transistor would add cost and other issues.

Also, to avoid camera movement over an extended time one would need a tripod, so why not use a lower ISO and the noise problem goes away.

This method cannot address the problem of low light AND fast changing subject.

vonBaloney · 11-02-2013, 11:27 PM

Originally posted by tim60

I have not confirmed it but it seems consistent with the theory that noise is random, so averaging of several must reduce noise. The number of frames which makes sense would confront the problem of change of the image from frame to frame - either from camera movement or subject change. Analogs of this noise reduction method have been used in electronics for many decades.

Also, to avoid camera movement over an extended time one would need a tripod, so why not use a lower ISO and the noise problem goes away.

This method cannot address the problem of low light AND fast changing subject.

Stacking software will line up the slightly different images (from handheld motion) and remove the noise. Works very well. But yes, static subjects only.

Giklab · 11-03-2013, 12:44 AM

Is it possible to do this on a K-5? I've tried doing underexposed multiple exposures, like Sony does, but haven't seen much improvement.

noVICE · 11-03-2013, 05:05 AM

Originally posted by Adam

Multi-frame NR is extremely effective. If you put it through a program like arcsoft you can virtually remove the noise completely!

Can you do this with RAW files in Photoshop or lightroom?

timcatn · 11-03-2013, 05:16 AM

Originally posted by noVICE

Can you do this with RAW files in Photoshop or lightroom?

Yes. You stack the files in layers and give individual opacity to the different layers.

Giklab · 11-03-2013, 05:30 AM

Originally posted by Giklab

Is it possible to do this on a K-5? I've tried doing underexposed multiple exposures, like Sony does, but haven't seen much improvement.

Derped a lot here. Thought you could do it in-camera.

noVICE · 11-03-2013, 05:33 AM

Originally posted by timcatn

Yes. You stack the files in layers and give individual opacity to the different layers.

Thanks! I can't wait to get this a shot.

....sheesh, I should have thought of that....need more sleep.

Alfie · 11-03-2013, 06:29 AM

Quote:

I found that if you shoot a single shot at 12800 and then compare it to a 12800 interval of 8 shots set to average, the noise reduction is incredible. Way better then using in camera noise reduction.

S/N by averaging random noise is expected to improve by the square root of N. Four shots should give a reduction by 2 – or 2.83 for 8.

Quote:

I tried a 19 shot average but at some point the averaging doesn't improve it any more. I think it's somewhere between 6-9 shots seems to provide the best results.

19 should still give a 54% improvement over 8: 100×(√19/√8–1). In astrophotography stacking many images is not uncommon.

lytrytyr · 11-03-2013, 08:52 AM

This is more of a technique thread than news or rumors. Mods?

**maxfield_photo** · 11-03-2013, 09:28 AM

Actually the camera is capable of doing this with no external software, just set it to multiple exposure mode, and squeeze of as many frames as your heart desires. Works in Raw or Jpeg, but in Raw, the displayed color temperature will be something goofy like 2 billion degrees kelvin. The image will still look fine.

11-02-2013, 10:41 PM	#1
Wayneheim New Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Photos: Albums Posts: 15	k3 interval shooting = great noise reduction Just got my k3 tonight and was putting it threw some tests. I was trying some high iso tests and playing with the interval shooting. I found that if you shoot a single shot at 12800 and then compare it to a 12800 interval of 8 shots set to average, the noise reduction is incredible. Way better then using in camera noise reduction. Try it at 52,000 and results were even more amazing. Could pull a much cleaner image this way then trying to use in camera noise reduction or Lightroom noise reduction. The image does end up a hair softer though but that's at 200 zoom. Tried the test at 2000 iso and it works there too but Lightroom can easily handle that noise almost as well. But interval and Lightroom is a great combination. Anyone else confirm tried this? I tried a 19 shot average but at some point the averaging doesn't improve it any more. I think it's somewhere between 6-9 shots seems to provide the best results. Attached is a 12,800 with some Lightroom sharpening and a bit of noise reduction. Wayne Attached Images

11-02-2013, 11:08 PM	#5
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,595	Originally posted by Wayneheim Just got my k3 tonight and was putting it threw some tests. I was trying some high iso tests and playing with the interval shooting. I found that if you shoot a single shot at 12800 and then compare it to a 12800 interval of 8 shots set to average, the noise reduction is incredible. Way better then using in camera noise reduction. Try it at 52,000 and results were even more amazing. Could pull a much cleaner image this way then trying to use in camera noise reduction or Lightroom noise reduction. The image does end up a hair softer though but that's at 200 zoom. Tried the test at 2000 iso and it works there too but Lightroom can easily handle that noise almost as well. But interval and Lightroom is a great combination. Anyone else confirm tried this? I tried a 19 shot average but at some point the averaging doesn't improve it any more. I think it's somewhere between 6-9 shots seems to provide the best results. Attached is a 12,800 with some Lightroom sharpening and a bit of noise reduction. Wayne Multi-frame NR is extremely effective. If you put it through a program like arcsoft you can virtually remove the noise completely! Adam PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide \| Site Help \| My Photography) PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

11-02-2013, 11:22 PM	#6
tim60 Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2011 Photos: Albums Posts: 8,743	Originally posted by Wayneheim Just got my k3 tonight and was putting it threw some tests. I was trying some high iso tests and playing with the interval shooting. I found that if you shoot a single shot at 12800 and then compare it to a 12800 interval of 8 shots set to average, the noise reduction is incredible. Way better then using in camera noise reduction. Try it at 52,000 and results were even more amazing. Could pull a much cleaner image this way then trying to use in camera noise reduction or Lightroom noise reduction. The image does end up a hair softer though but that's at 200 zoom. Tried the test at 2000 iso and it works there too but Lightroom can easily handle that noise almost as well. But interval and Lightroom is a great combination. Anyone else confirm tried this? I tried a 19 shot average but at some point the averaging doesn't improve it any more. I think it's somewhere between 6-9 shots seems to provide the best results. Attached is a 12,800 with some Lightroom sharpening and a bit of noise reduction. Wayne I have not confirmed it but it seems consistent with the theory that noise is random, so averaging of several must reduce noise. The number of frames which makes sense would confront the problem of change of the image from frame to frame - either from camera movement or subject change. Analogs of this noise reduction method have been used in electronics for many decades. Interesting that the first place I encountered this was in a low noise amplifier for moving coil cartridges for playing vinyl records (remember them) - there were 8 transistors in parallel to cancel out the effect of noise in each. I never thought if there was a theoretical limit to the number which could be used or if it was just a practical 'diminishing returns' based limit to adding more - given that each additional transistor would add cost and other issues. Also, to avoid camera movement over an extended time one would need a tripod, so why not use a lower ISO and the noise problem goes away. This method cannot address the problem of low light AND fast changing subject. Last edited by tim60; 11-02-2013 at 11:27 PM. Reason: added to paragraph 1

11-03-2013, 06:29 AM	#13
Alfie Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Vienna, Austria Posts: 51	sqrt(N) Quote: I found that if you shoot a single shot at 12800 and then compare it to a 12800 interval of 8 shots set to average, the noise reduction is incredible. Way better then using in camera noise reduction. S/N by averaging random noise is expected to improve by the square root of N. Four shots should give a reduction by 2 – or 2.83 for 8. Quote: I tried a 19 shot average but at some point the averaging doesn't improve it any more. I think it's somewhere between 6-9 shots seems to provide the best results. 19 should still give a 54% improvement over 8: 100×(√19/√8–1). In astrophotography stacking many images is not uncommon.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax K10D long exposure noise reduction when shooting RAW?	Robert S Donovan	Pentax DSLR Discussion	30	08-19-2013 11:42 AM
Interval shooting	shudderbug9	Pentax K-30 & K-50	10	01-08-2013 08:32 PM
Interval shooting	mamethot	Pentax Q	11	10-20-2012 08:43 PM
Interval Shooting	FragileBird	Pentax K-30 & K-50	4	08-23-2012 01:16 PM
Interval shooting	trapa65	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	2	03-22-2012 05:38 AM

11-02-2013, 10:48 PM	#2
JohnBee Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Newrfoundland Photos: Albums Posts: 4,667	Looks good. I seem to of read the same figures on the theoretical frame limit(8) for improvements. Having said that, multi-frame noise reduction works very well, though I have yet to find a practical use for it against that of a slower shutter and lower ISO myself.

11-02-2013, 10:54 PM	#3
vonBaloney Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Albuquerque, NM Posts: 6,029	Originally posted by JohnBee Looks good. I seem to of read the same figures on the theoretical frame limit(8) for improvements. Having said that, multi-frame noise reduction works very well, though I have yet to find a practical use for it against that of a slower shutter and lower ISO myself. Handheld night shots.

11-02-2013, 11:03 PM	#4
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	Originally posted by JohnBee though I have yet to find a practical use for it against that of a slower shutter and lower ISO myself. Sony has had a neat implementation of this for years. It works quite well on NEX and RX100 for static scenes at night or in poor lighting when you don't have a good tripod or monopod around. It can also broaden the dynamic range of an image considerably in any lighting. Downside is that it only creates JPEGs. I guess doing it in the K-3 does the same.

11-02-2013, 11:27 PM	#7
vonBaloney Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Albuquerque, NM Posts: 6,029	Originally posted by tim60 I have not confirmed it but it seems consistent with the theory that noise is random, so averaging of several must reduce noise. The number of frames which makes sense would confront the problem of change of the image from frame to frame - either from camera movement or subject change. Analogs of this noise reduction method have been used in electronics for many decades. Also, to avoid camera movement over an extended time one would need a tripod, so why not use a lower ISO and the noise problem goes away. This method cannot address the problem of low light AND fast changing subject. Stacking software will line up the slightly different images (from handheld motion) and remove the noise. Works very well. But yes, static subjects only.

11-03-2013, 12:44 AM	#8
Giklab Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Slovenia Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,182	Is it possible to do this on a K-5? I've tried doing underexposed multiple exposures, like Sony does, but haven't seen much improvement.

11-03-2013, 05:05 AM	#9
noVICE Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Brisbane Photos: Gallery Posts: 164	Originally posted by Adam Multi-frame NR is extremely effective. If you put it through a program like arcsoft you can virtually remove the noise completely! Can you do this with RAW files in Photoshop or lightroom?

11-03-2013, 05:16 AM	#10
timcatn Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Trondheim Posts: 237	Originally posted by noVICE Can you do this with RAW files in Photoshop or lightroom? Yes. You stack the files in layers and give individual opacity to the different layers.

11-03-2013, 05:30 AM	#11
Giklab Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Slovenia Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,182	Originally posted by Giklab Is it possible to do this on a K-5? I've tried doing underexposed multiple exposures, like Sony does, but haven't seen much improvement. Derped a lot here. Thought you could do it in-camera.

11-03-2013, 05:33 AM	#12
noVICE Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Brisbane Photos: Gallery Posts: 164	Originally posted by timcatn Yes. You stack the files in layers and give individual opacity to the different layers. Thanks! I can't wait to get this a shot. ....sheesh, I should have thought of that....need more sleep.

11-03-2013, 08:52 AM	#14
lytrytyr Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2011 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,310	This is more of a technique thread than news or rumors. Mods?

11-03-2013, 09:28 AM	#15
maxfield_photo Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 1,216	Actually the camera is capable of doing this with no external software, just set it to multiple exposure mode, and squeeze of as many frames as your heart desires. Works in Raw or Jpeg, but in Raw, the displayed color temperature will be something goofy like 2 billion degrees kelvin. The image will still look fine.