[Jim Gilbert]

Hi,
New to DSLR photography. I have some experience shooting film 20+ years ago. When film went away I sort of lost track and I am trying to come up to speed.
Went out this morning to get some shots in the early morning. Most of my shots came out super noisy. I am trying to get my head around changing ISO to compensate for exposure. That is something I really never did as a film photographer. I had my trusty tripod but never broke it out.
This is a shot looking out on Port Jefferson harbor.
I hope I did this correctly
Jim

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

[nomadkng]

A "noisy" image is a result of your signal to noise ratio being less than "optimum". It is more apparent in the darker tones because 0,0,0 is black. Data from a sensor is stored right to left (if viewing a histogram) with more data available for highlights than shadows. thus, you get more noise in blacker areas than you do whiter areas.

It's the basic premise of "Exposing to the Right" (ETTR). Google it, and/or try Luminous Landscape for articles/tutorials.

Lastly, the image shown would have been a great candidate for Graduated Neutral Density Filters. A 1-2 stop GND would have balanced the highlights (top half) with the foreground (shadows), allowing for more data capture. More data means less noise. Your overall shutter speed would probably have dropped 1-2 stops as well, so you would have needed that tripod you had with you.

[jeverettfine]

Yes, ISO changes from shot to shot is something us film photographers never had. It can be a fabulous tool, but your experience with film will be valuable. When hand holding or taking photos of an active subject, I tend to set my ISO manually so I can get the shutter speed and F-stop I want. I like your mention of "tripod". Most people don't realize that 90% of most photos can be made using one. This should also be familiar to us film users. Tripod + Low ISO = a sharper, smoother, less grainy (noisy) image. Post processing in the computer can fix many of the noise and sharpness problems, but if you are like me, you want great pix right from the start.

[Sagitta]

Another trick if you run into a situation like that would be HDR photography. Its basically a series of snaps at different exposures that you can then go in afterwards and combine to make one image. This way you can get a shot where your shadows are looking good (but highlights are blown) and mix it with the shot where your highlights are good, but shadows are lost, as well as the 'in between shots' that lay in the middle.

You should have a bracketing setting on the K-50 somewhere that will let you take a series of differently exposed shots.

Its a useful technique, but very, very easy to overdo (yielding unrealistic results). I tend to like using it for sunset and sunrise shots however as it helps keep what I want in the image.

Also, even if you don't HDR your shots, that bracketing setting is useful as well as you can go back in and pick the 'best' shot of the lot as far as highlights and shadows go afterwards.

[Jim Gilbert]

Thanks for the input.
@Jeverrettfine I am always looking for the best picture from the start. I spent a lot of time in my darkroom and have always found that although you can tweak some great results from the enlarger it is always better to start off with an image that is as close to where to where you want from the beginning.
@Nomadkng reading up on ETTR. Histograms are a whole new world for me.

---------- Post added 01-29-15 at 10:26 AM ----------

Thanks @Sagitta. I have read up on bracketing on the K50 and love that you can customize what you want to expose up or down. How much do you usually bracket up and down?
I am looking at post production software. I have to find something that is useful and fits my budget.

[Kath]

Welcome, Jim. Like your photo of Pt. Jeff. I grew up on LI and miss the Sound. I see from your EXIF info that you're shooting the K-50, wonderful camera! Having started out in film, I understand the process you're going through with ISO options. It will come to you quickly, after x-many photos, messing around with how far up the ISO stairs you can go before you're dealing with too much noise for your photo. The one above is really nice, ISO of 100 gives you that creamier look. I shoot TAV most of the time, controlling the ISO range I want beforehand. That way, I don't go up too high on ISO inadvertently, but can choose it if necessary. I will second the comment above about the tripod. I use it as often as possible because it gives me more latitude with my shutter speed, especially helpful in low light. I also use a heavy-duty monopod when I want to be more mobile. Good luck to you and have fun!

P.S.: Just saw your note about processing software. Folks on here have their favorites; mine is Lightroom. Great organizing tool and has everything you need for most processing. Photoshop is the next step up, is expensive, but has the most tools for altering your image. I rarely find a need for it.

[Sagitta]

Thanks for the input.
@Jeverrettfine I am always looking for the best picture from the start. I spent a lot of time in my darkroom and have always found that although you can tweak some great results from the enlarger it is always better to start off with an image that is as close to where to where you want from the beginning.
@Nomadkng reading up on ETTR. Histograms are a whole new world for me.

---------- Post added 01-29-15 at 10:26 AM ----------

Thanks @Sagitta. I have read up on bracketing on the K50 and love that you can customize what you want to expose up or down. How much do you usually bracket up and down?
I am looking at post production software. I have to find something that is useful and fits my budget.

I usually just go with 'normal' then +1 or +2 (usually +2) up and down with the K-30 since it limits brackets to 3 shots. I'm ordering a K-3 to replace the 30 though, and I believe that that will allow for more exposures when bracketing, so will probably change up how I go about doing so.

I also don't know if you mentioned it or not, but do you shoot in RAW or JPG? With sunset/sunrise/generally dark shots RAW tends to be a much better option since you can yank details from the murk much more easily than you can from a JPG, as more detail is stored in the RAW files to play with.

While you can shoot them in JPG, the ability to go in and much with them after the fact gets extremely limited with a JPG file.

[Jim Gilbert]

@Sagitta I am shooting RAW files. Always hedging my bets to keep as much detail as possible.

[Bruce Clark]

Hi

Tricky scene for getting exposure just right and an ideal candidate for bracketing or HDR. I notice the exif data suggests spot metering was used. This suggests to me you know pretty well what you are doing. Coming from film, I also miss the really low ISO films that were around, Ektar 25 in particular however digital does have its compensations.

Lightroom (LR) is a very good PP solution as is Photo Shop Elements (PSE) basically a cut down version of the full Photoshop. They are quite different in approach and functionality. I am not sure of pricing but I believe both are priced under A$200 and would be substantially cheaper in US.

LR has lens profiles. PSE does not
LR noise reduction is better than PSE
Spot healing in PSE is far superior to LR
PSE has layers LR does not
PSE has pano stitching and HDR
Both offer cataloging.
Both offer compatibility with third party plugins eg Topaz
A lot of experts on both systems are here on this forum.

Fortunately you can work with both on the one image and get the best of both worlds. There is a slew of other programs out there some free, some expensive each with advantages and disadvantages.

[Jim Gilbert]

Thanks Bruce,
I have been researching software and am leaning towards Elements as I have some experience with Photoshop. I am hoping the learning curve will be a little more managable.

[wildman]

@Sagitta I am shooting RAW files. Always hedging my bets to keep as much detail as possible.

Just fussed with the screen dump a bit...
If you are shooting RAW there should be plenty of latitude in the original file, without going to bracketing.

[TaoMaas]

I am trying to get my head around changing ISO to compensate for exposure. That is something I really never did as a film photographer. I had my trusty tripod but never broke it out.

Don't get fooled by the ability to use a high ISO. Just as in the film days, when you used your tripod so that you could shoot with the slowest, sharpest film, the same applies to digital photography. Sure, we can crank up the ISO and get good images, but on a stationary subject like this, break out your tripod and shoot at the lowest ISO your camera offers. Save the higher ISO options for times when carrying a tripod isn't a good option. Use the same sensibilities you used with film, but remember that anything over ISO 400 is no longer crap.

[Jim Gilbert]

@ Wildman that is a vast improvement. I really need to go back and work on the original.