Timeline for How do I reduce noise, given that I have complete control over everything else?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
22 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 11, 2011 at 14:02 | comment | added | Andrew Stacey | @chills42: That's one of the ones I read before posting this one and which confused me a bit. I haven't lurked here too much, but I hoped (and it seems by the response I got that I was right) that similar-but-not-quite-the-same questions were okay. It's useful to have the link in the list on the right as well. | |
| Feb 11, 2011 at 14:01 | comment | added | Andrew Stacey | @anthonyg: Yes, here more than anywhere I think that one of the best ways to say "thank you" is to show how it's made a difference! | |
| Feb 11, 2011 at 13:56 | comment | added | nthonygreen | Thanks for adding the 'after' shot -- really helps us to see the practical value of all this great advice! | |
| Feb 10, 2011 at 22:01 | vote | accept | Andrew Stacey | ||
| Feb 10, 2011 at 21:12 | history | edited | Andrew Stacey | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
Added a shot taken using the advice.
|
| Feb 10, 2011 at 15:03 | comment | added | chills42 | There is another related question: photo.stackexchange.com/q/11/67 | |
| Feb 7, 2011 at 15:19 | answer | added | user3749 | timeline score: 0 | |
| Feb 5, 2011 at 10:13 | answer | added | markku | timeline score: 1 | |
| Feb 5, 2011 at 2:03 | comment | added | Greg | The more light you can throw onto it the better off you'll be. It will allow you to increase your depth-of-field by using a smaller aperture, and, at the same time, reduce noise by reducing your ISO. I'd go for a lower ISO as the priority because it will reduce the noise, allowing you to crop into the image if necessarily. | |
| Feb 4, 2011 at 22:22 | comment | added | Nick Bedford | Try to use whiter lights as well, though if you're shooting raw, fixing white balance isn't a big issue. | |
| Feb 4, 2011 at 22:13 | answer | added | ahockley | timeline score: 1 | |
| Feb 4, 2011 at 21:06 | answer | added | jrista | timeline score: 4 | |
| Feb 4, 2011 at 20:51 | comment | added | whuber | @Staale f/9 may be the widest setting that provides sufficient depth of field. The difference in diffraction effects between f/9 and f/8, or even f/9 and f/5.6, is still very small. | |
| Feb 4, 2011 at 20:36 | comment | added | Staale S | f/9 may be a bit much on an m43 sensor I think. You are getting into diffraction territory which will make the photo a bit unsharp all over. Open up a bit, I think f/5.6-f/8 should be optimal for that system. Not that this has anything at all to do with the noise, just thought I'd mention it. | |
| Feb 4, 2011 at 20:23 | answer | added | Berin Loritsch | timeline score: 4 | |
| Feb 4, 2011 at 20:17 | answer | added | Craig Walker | timeline score: 3 | |
| Feb 4, 2011 at 20:16 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackPhotos/status/33619952623689728 | ||
| Feb 4, 2011 at 20:03 | answer | added | chills42 | timeline score: 30 | |
| Feb 4, 2011 at 20:01 | answer | added | rfusca | timeline score: 2 | |
| Feb 4, 2011 at 20:00 | answer | added | Matt Grum | timeline score: 14 | |
| Feb 4, 2011 at 19:57 | answer | added | mmr | timeline score: 9 | |
| Feb 4, 2011 at 19:53 | history | asked | Andrew Stacey | CC BY-SA 2.5 |