Why on earth do I get grainy photos?

norahbattie

norahbattie

Suspended / Banned
Messages
348
Name
Nads
Edit My Images
Yes
So I went out with my camera to a restaurant the other day and i have to admit we were sat in pretty dim lighting and i forgot to take my flash not that i like using it anyhoo..
so popped the camera into av priority and shot wide open but my problem is i get such grainy photos...i hate it, hate it and hate it....
can anyone help? this photo was taken a f1.8 ISO 3200 1/30, thanking you :)
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=2769031&l=6124ffa43c&id=277701506
 
It's the high ISO try a noise removal programme like Neat Image free download
 
Last edited:
but if i go lower, i get slower shutter speeds and blurred photos, i left the ISO on auto and let the camera decide
 
I would have thought that the 5DII would be pretty good at high ISO. Did you use exposure compensation? Overexposing a tad helps high ISO performlance although you would have had an even slower shutter speed unless you cranked up the ISO even higher. I always find it's a case of maintaining a balance between the two.
 
@ 3200 ISO the 5DMKII is still quite good. shadow areas will always show higher image grain, also exposure brightening in post production increases the noise a fair bit too.
 
Looks about right to me for images taken on a Canon at 3200iso and 30th sec wide-open...
It wasn't that long ago that images taken at only 1600iso were hopelessly grainy, and only acceptable to Sports and News photographers, so maybe you should be thankful you're not using 1990's technology..

If you really don't like it, don't want to use flash and have the money, you'll need to upgrade to a more expensive camera that has better low-light capabilities...

Or a Nikon (sorry...lol...couldn't help myself)...
 
Unfortunately I didn't dial in any over or under exposure, again let the camera decide..I think its because I find it quite difficult to figure out the lighting situation in any particular place..i saw on here recently about LADS...light add dark subtract. I also can't figure out if spot metering gives a better picture or evaluative.
I really do need to go out and practice with my camera some more unfortunately no time between exams and work :(

reading on the forum, everyone says the 5DMkII is great but I don't know I am really struggling to get great photos on it. Only I can do it when there is still life!!
 
Last edited:
You have a lot of noise in that and I'd expect a 5DII to be a lot cleaner than that. Was the image underexposed and pulled in PP? That would account for the extra noise but the image is also still blurred so still needed a faster shutter speed. I generally don't go below 1/60 when shooting people and prefer to keep to 1/125 to be safe. 1/30 is WAY too slow.

Shoot in Aperture priority and set the ISO as high as you need to get to between 1/60 and 1/125. :)
 
Last edited:
AliB said:
You have a lot of noise in that and I'd expect a 5DII to be a lot cleaner than that. Was the image underexposed and pulled in PP? That would account for the extra noise but the image is also still blurred so still needed a faster shutter speed. I generally don't go below 1/60 when shooting people and prefer to keep to 1/125 to be safe. 1/30 is WAY too slow.

Shoot in Aperture priority and set the ISO as high as you need to get to between 1/60 and 1/125. :)
Click to expand...

Straight out of the camera with no pp:
Kids_0006.jpg


Thank you for the tips..does this mean its worth going into manual and setting aperture and shutter speed and let the camera decide ISO? The restaurant had really dim light. I just find adding the flash to the 5D so bulky. Or is there something wrong with my camera or me? The latter being more likely...
 
bear in mind the algorithm facebook uses to compress images always seems to result in some image noise.
 
very true but very annoying...others post their SLR photos and they look great..mine look grainy!! I thought it might be down to shoot in RAW
 
That noise reduction has worked very well :)

But you could solve the noise problem without doing anything other than filling the frame with the shot in the first place. The cropped image linked in your OP has thrown away 50% of the image area - you've got a full frame 5D2 but are effectively using it like a crop format camera. Do not crop! It is death to image quality.

In addition, you are asking a lot shooting in very low light with high ISO and the plain background really shows the noise, which isn't nearly so visible on his shirt. Pic looks like it may have been underexposed, and with a forgiving subject like that you could probably push another two stops of light into that with a bit of expose-to-the-right technique which would surely eliminate any noise, but of course you'd also lose two stops.

First rule of photogtaphy - always fill the frame!

Edit: Learn to love flash :D It's fantastic once you've got over the initial learning hurdle. With careful use of bounce-fill technique there, I think that image would look better and still perfectly natural, plus with stunning quality. Photography is about light and if you haven't got much of that vital ingredient, then you end up chasing your tail. Ultimately you will get caught out if you just keep cranking the ISO and trying to fix it in post processing. Get some light in there!
 
Last edited:
I think it is better keep the photos a bit under-exposed instead put a higher ISO. You can correct it later in Lightroom, Capture One etc. software. For me is this more efficient (must take in RAW). I normally don't go higher than ISO 1600 and not below 60sec. for taking people with my Canon 5D II.

Although I have 1,2 L lenses, personally I use a flashgun for photos in restaurants.
For example: ISO 200 / f5.6 / 60 sec. and indirect flash-in. May need change setting on the flashgun the EV -/+ (depend on the situation).

White Balance: Manual? What or which setting did you use?
 
norahbattie said:
but if i go lower, i get slower shutter speeds and blurred photos, i left the ISO on auto and let the camera decide
Click to expand...

The pic you posted is still blurred... So it is both grainy and blurred.. As Hoppy and others have said, get into using flash, you photos will instantly improve.. Learn to use manual ISO, never use auto. You could try Aperture Priority with manual ISO.
 
Thing is with high ISO comes high grain, the best thing you can do is invest in a little table tripod from eBay, then you can put the ISO much lower and still have a nice crisp photo.
 
I used manual white balance I think :thinking: (set to daylight so prob hence the warm look to the photo)
I am not quite sure why I leave my flash at home every time I think its the sheer thought of pulling out a huge 3 kg camera and flash at a quiet family dinner and being more like paparazzi!

I have some links to other photos I have taken at www.photographydoctor.co.uk/duku username: duku password duku

I am not sure what possesed them to ask me to take their photos but I just did it as a favour to a friend
Enjoy the music :cool:

These were taken using bounced flash
 
Last edited:
What about movement from the child though? found it sooo difficult to shoot my niece who was moving from side to side all the time
 
c4rv3r said:
Thing is with high ISO comes high grain, the best thing you can do is invest in a little table tripod from eBay, then you can put the ISO much lower and still have a nice crisp photo.
Click to expand...

This may improve the picture, but the person in front of the camera is still moving (especially children).
 
I work on the basis that a well exposed high iso image will have less noise than an underexposed one. So I'd switch to 6400 iso rather than have a picture which is dark and needs the exposure increased when raw processing. As soon as you brighten a high iso picture the noise leaps out at you. Better to have some lost or near lost highlights than underexposed overall.

High iso and wide aperture in Av and check what shutter speed you can get to stop subject movement. 1/30th needs luck to come out sharp with a moving child. Faster would be better.
 
Hi Nads,

He is a lovely looking lad.

You have a great camera and a great lens for low light performance but sometimes you have to be realistic about what even the best equipment can do. In a dim restaurant I think you have done pretty well. The main problem, as has already been pointed out is the white balance, if you shoot in RAW you can easily correct that afterwards or set it to Tungsten for this kind of lighting. I would also crop it down to remove the distractions on the left and maybe boost the exposure a bit at is it a tad dark.

I had a little play on Lightroom, I hope you don't mind, happy to take it down if you do. I personally don't think the noise is the main problem...

Lightroom doesn't do a bad job on the white balance on JPEG's either...

Kids_0006.jpg
 
Last edited:
norahbattie said:
I used manual white balance I think :thinking: (set to daylight so prob hence the warm look to the photo)
I am not quite sure why I leave my flash at home every time I think its the sheer thought of pulling out a huge 3 kg camera and flash at a quiet family dinner and being more like paparazzi!
...
These were taken using bounced flash
Click to expand...

manual white balance can be tricky (especially in restaurant with different lights). So I end up with pre-setting from the camera (tungsten). Afterwards I correct them in lightroom.

To be not like a paparazzi I took my good compact camera (one with manual setting and RAW) ;) But I believe if you asked them in advance weather you can bring your big camera, it should be normally no problem.

Instead of bouncer, I recommend using a "foam rubber" (sorry, I don't know how to say in English)in black or neutral white and a normal rubber band for fixing. You can buy it in DIY Shop or a good paper shop. It costs maybe only 2 pound and have more control about the light.

Here is an instruction:
http://www.abetterbouncecard.com/
 
Thanks very much, looks much better than the job I did on the crop :)

I want to thank everyone for their advice, its really appreciated. I just need to take it all on board and use it now
 
Compare that ISO 3200 image with a similar one taken on film. Want less noise? D700.
 
I have always been a canon girl...picked up a nikon once and couldn't figure out to use it..i guess people prefer one or the other
 
I spent years with Canon before switching in Feb, you just have to learn to use it, it's a tool for me so I'll pick up whatever does the job best irrespective of the label on it ;)
 
AliB said:
I spent years with Canon before switching in Feb, you just have to learn to use it, it's a tool for me so I'll pick up whatever does the job best irrespective of the label on it ;)
Click to expand...

Do you miss your canon gear though? i fear i may not like the switch and cannot afford to have both
 
Nope! :)

I had a 1DsII and a 5D and the only thing I actually miss is the 1Ds when shooting in portrait orientation, the focus points were easier to move than on the D700 with a grip.

The Nikon AF points need to be active to be moved so you need to half press the shutter to activate the points and then move them, from memory the Canon ones could be activated BY moving their positions. Either that or they just stayed active for longer.

Other than that the Nikons absolutly lay waste to my (Admittedly older) Canons. I shoot weddings and the shots that I reject on technical grounds when reviewing the files have dropped a lot and I don't have to use any NR software now either, the files appear to be better exposed and just a lot cleaner. I did an album design last week and other than some colour balancing I had not done anything to the images.

I'll pick up a Canon a Nikon a Leica an Olympus a Hasselblad or a Mamiya they are all just light tight boxes with some way of recording an image. It's still the three major variables of ISO, shutter and aperture that make pictures. The label on the front means diddly squat to me :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top