File :-(, x, )
Photo Grain? Anonymous
Been taking a few snaps like this recently- no EXIF, sorry- curious if there's a way to make them less grainy without switching to an SLR (Canon Powershot S70 is the shooter's cam) Advice/suggestions?
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon PowerShot S70Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaLens Size5.81 - 20.69 mmFirmware VersionFirmware Version 1.01Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution180 dpiVertical Resolution180 dpiImage Created2007:02:04 05:45:12Exposure Time8 secF-Numberf/2.8Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias0 EVFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length5.81 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2048Image Height1536RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualScene Capture TypeStandardExposure ModeManualFocus TypeAutoMetering ModeSpotISO Speed Rating400SharpnessNormalSaturationNormalContrastNormalShooting ModeManualImage SizeUnknownFocus ModeSingleDrive ModeSingleFlash ModeOffCompression SettingFineMacro ModeNormalSubject Distance1.870 mWhite BalanceAutoExposure Compensation3Sensor ISO Speed224Image Number598-9891
>> Anonymous
apologies for double post- anon's first post in /p/, clearly a noob. didnt know exif was automatic...
>> Anonymous
this "grain" is called noise
and it's given by your camera ISO 400 at the time...
you have to lower your ISO if your camera isn't good enough..
for example I have one S3IS, and the ISO 400 is unusable already...
I have to stick with ISO 200 and use a little neat image afterwards..
but decent SLRs can go up to iso 1600 or even more without any noise...
set iso manually to 200 or lower, it's a matter of trying the settings that work for your camera
if you don't know what iso is, seriously, lurk moar
>> Anonymous
>>59469
Uhhhh, lol. "but decent SLRs can go up to iso 1600 or even more without any noise..." more like 400 or so before is starts to become noticeable. But still, an improvement.
>> eku !8cibvLQ11s
     File :-(, x)
>>59610

Note, I didn't take this photo. This photo is from here: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E1DMK3/E1DMK3A7.HTM

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS-1D Mark IIIFirmware VersionFirmware Version 5.3.1Serial Number0000500330Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:03:01 18:18:47Exposure Time1/160 secF-Numberf/5.0Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating6400Lens Aperturef/5.0Exposure Bias0 EVFlashNo FlashFocal Length50.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width3888Image Height2592RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualScene Capture TypeStandardExposure ModeManualFocus TypeAutoMetering ModeEvaluativeSharpnessUnknownSaturationNormalContrastNormalShooting ModeManualImage SizeLargeFocus ModeOne-ShotDrive ModeSingleFlash ModeExternal FlashCompression SettingFineMacro ModeNormalWhite BalanceManual TemperatureExposure Compensation3Sensor ISO Speed352Camera Actuations2228Color Matrix129Color Temperature2800 K
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>59639
Man oh man, do want 1d Mk III.

Still, most "decent" digital SLRs get noticeably noisy above 400. For "No noise at 1600" your option is pretty much *only* the 1d Mk III. Canon's other pro-line cameras are usable at 1600 but with visible noise, and the lower ones have 1600 pretty much as a last resort.
>> Anonymous
>>59469
>for example I have one S3IS, and the ISO 400 is unusable already...
>I have to stick with ISO 200 and use a little neat image afterwards..

Oh my, you're anal. Most digicams are no messier with noise than the same speed film was years ago. Film's gotten cleaner, but still: go look at some old, "classic" images. They're grainy as a pile of wheat.
>> Anonymous
A guy with a MkIII underexposed a ISO 6400 pic by a stop and came up with a theoretically properly exposed ISO 12800 picture.

It didn't have an horrible amount of noise either.
>> Anonymous
>>59644
Yes, but film has pretty, "soft" noise. Digicam noise makes baby jesus cry.
>> Anonymous
>>59639
well since he's handling still shots, he could have gone up to 1/60 or 1/80, so he wouldn't need to use that stellar high iso but, it must be some kind of experience, cause come on, the guy have a markIII, can't be a noob.

you guys are blaming about noticeable iso after 400...
I've seen even rebel xti pictures at iso 1600, and they grain was perfectly fine after some photochop...
well even my ISO 200 on s3 is grainy too...
I was trying to talk in "usable" ways, I mean... you guys are being too stiff on technique...
and on top of that, calling me a total noob, just cause I'm trying to sound reasonable, to a guy who don't even know what iso is

you guys are like
"you want no grain on your pictures? go homeless, sell your house and buy one markIII kay? ANYTHING ELSE IS CRAP"

and yes, indeed, digicam noise make baby jesus cry