Menu
What's new
The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

P25 Plus noise test/ Very Boring sorry

Guy Mancuso

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Great the results look good and the Pro version looks like you can just run a action. Downloading a demo right now
 
Guy Mancuso

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Thanks Greg just downloaded the demo so it puts grids on the image and I just used the default which maybe too much but anyway lets see without than with noiseware. Now i turned everything off in C1 all set to zero
 
D

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
Capture One 4.1.X (also C1 3.7.X) has one major technical advantage over any other means of noise reduction when used with a phase one back: it uses data from the dark-slide exposure. Anytime you change shutter speed the back records a dark-slide exposure which maps where and how heat and interference are effecting the CCD. This is most noticeable in long exposures and to some extent high-ISO shots.

While I prefer the look of the noise reduction in C14 to anything else I've seen this is largely a personal aesthetic choice. Even if you prefer the look you get from a third party noise reduction tool I would suggest doing a minimal amount of noise reduction in Capture One to take advantage of the dark slide information before processing in 16-bit finishing the noise reduction in that third party software. This is similar to my suggested sharpening workflow of doing minimal pre-sharpening in C14 where micro-detail can best be rendered, and then doing print-sharpening in either PS or your preferred 3rd party sharpening/enlargement program.

Finally, WB and light-source-color can have a dramatic effect on noise. If you're shooting in yellowish light (e.g. outdoors at night with street lights) then the blue pixels on the CCD are going to be drastically underexposed. White balancing a heavily yellow photo to be more neutral is, in fact, just a fancy way of boosting the effective ISO of the blue channel. This is one of the reasons why MFDBs are going to outperform even the best dSLRs in harsh lighting situations (contrast and weird color temperatures) which push dynamic range, shadow recovery, and bit depth to the limit. I've seen noisy images from dSLRs which only needed noise reduction on the blue channel to be usable again, just don't do that to an extreme or you'll get blue halos around sharp shadow-to-midtone transitions.

Doug Peterson
Technician, Capture Integration, Phase One Dealer
Personal Portfolio
 
EH21

EH21

Member
Doug,
Thanks for the info - now I have 2 questions for you. Is there a native WB of the Phase backs - in other words is there an optimum color temperature for lighting? Second question, will I see less noise if I set the WB in camera prior to the exposure rather than after in post?

Thanks,
Eric
 
lance_schad

lance_schad

Workshop Member
Eric great questions. I am sitting right across from Doug and he is tied up at the moment so he asked I send back a reply.
In regards to the native WB temp that is a very good question, he is investigating that.
On the second one the WB that is being applied is to the preview of the RAW not the file itself so it should make no difference where you WB it.
Lance Schad
Capture Integration - Miami/Atlanta
305-394-3196 cell | 305-534-5702 office
Capture Integration
My Blog
[email protected]
 
Guy Mancuso

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
After further playing around , I honestly just like lowering the luminance in C1 and maybe playing around with color to get some of that taken care of. This is at the 800 setting which i don't expect to use often but nice to have it and see some nice results from it. I think we need to remember also is will we really see it in print and I am on a project right now for the next two weeks doing a book but i will explore that some more with my 3800. Lance sent me a 28mm this weekend to play with so I want to try that first and start playing around again with the P25 plus and get a little more used to working with it but so far i love the files and working with this back. images are just looking so nice and I need to get this on a real job and get it going. Been a little slow there
 
EH21

EH21

Member
Guy,
One other recommendation for you for P25+ ISO 800 files when using C1... when turing down the luminance noise IMHO you can also get a better looking file by also decreasing the standard sharpening. If you haven't already played with this, give it a go, because the standard sharpening also tends to sharpen the grain which again IMHO does not improve the image.
Eric Hiss
 
Guy Mancuso

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Yes and i had that up slightly in all of these files so when i hit the 800 i can reduce that a touch and actually lower the noise more. that is something I will also play with this weekend
 
P

Panopeeper

Guest
Guy,

1. when processing in C1, do you need to adjust the exposure (or brightness, or how ever C1 calls this) of the higher ISO shots, and if yes, by how much?

2. do you mind posting the lower ISO raws too to either CF000040 or to CF000064?

Thanks
Gabor
 
Guy Mancuso

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Bathroom the exposure was slightly under overall and the Kitchen is actually pushed up a little but I did not play with any shadow recovery because that would throw things off and that would bring in other issues. So if anything just brought up the exposure . I think the kitchen was 3/4 of a stop so more like 1250 but I would rather not say that as completely accurate . C1 things look a little darker than LR so who is correct is the question. I need to find those files if I even kept them. I'm a clean freak sometimes with files and usually don't keep test files around
 
T

thsinar

Guest
Guy,

it would really be nice to see these files, as raw as possible. I did download your TIFs but these are definitively no raws.

Is there no way to get "rawer" out of the back?

Thanks and best regards,
Thierry

Guy Mancuso said:
Bathroom the exposure was slightly under overall and the Kitchen is actually pushed up a little but I did not play with any shadow recovery because that would throw things off and that would bring in other issues. So if anything just brought up the exposure . I think the kitchen was 3/4 of a stop so more like 1250 but I would rather not say that as completely accurate . C1 things look a little darker than LR so who is correct is the question. I need to find those files if I even kept them. I'm a clean freak sometimes with files and usually don't keep test files around
Click to expand...
 
P

Panopeeper

Guest
Guy,

your CF000040 was three stops underexposed, CF000064 even more. I mean with "underexposed" compared to the maximum exposure without clipping (except for the lamps, their center has been clipped ic CF000062).

This makes me think that the P25 Plus does not have different ISOs, just like the Sinar 54 (unlike the P45 Plus, which does have different ISO gains.

I can tell this with certainty only if I see raw files with a serie of ISOs; same scenery, same lighting.

Thierry,

those TIFs are pretty raw. You can open them with ACR (in Photoshop or Lightroom).

Gabor
 
T

thsinar

Guest
Dear Gabor,

yes, I have seen that one can open them, and noticed the same under-exposure.

Thanks,
Thierry

Panopeeper said:
Thierry,

those TIFs are pretty raw. You can open them with ACR (in Photoshop or Lightroom).

Gabor
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top