Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: recovering severely underexposed pics in C1?

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    belgļe
    Posts
    1,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    recovering severely underexposed pics in C1?

    long story short, i was a numbskull... was shooting in manual for bright stage lights (f/1, 1/125, 160) and then forgot to return to normal after the show.

    as luck would have it, i have a few shots that i really quite like... when i worked on one of them, i was pretty amazed a how much detail i could recover (M8), but the artifacts were quite nasty -- especially on a face.

    is there some sort of magic that can be worked? does normal noise reduction work in this instance? i've been playing around with different variants (using C1 and/or CS3), but haven't been successful.

    i won't die if it can't be done, i'm just curious if anybody has been successful in case i get sloppy again in the future.

    TIA.

  2. #2
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: recovering severely underexposed pics in C1?

    Quote Originally Posted by cam View Post
    long story short, i was a numbskull... was shooting in manual for bright stage lights (f/1, 1/125, 160) and then forgot to return to normal after the show.

    as luck would have it, i have a few shots that i really quite like... when i worked on one of them, i was pretty amazed a how much detail i could recover (M8), but the artifacts were quite nasty -- especially on a face.

    is there some sort of magic that can be worked? does normal noise reduction work in this instance? i've been playing around with different variants (using C1 and/or CS3), but haven't been successful.

    i won't die if it can't be done, i'm just curious if anybody has been successful in case i get sloppy again in the future.

    TIA.
    Depending on the color of the light in the room you may find that one of the three channels (R, B, or G) had more light. Also, the blue channel is usually the noisiest. So if you convert to black and white in Photoshop using only, e.g. the red channel you may find far less noise.

    Of course then it would be black and white :-).

    Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
    __________________
    Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
    Phase One, Leaf, Cambo, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Eizo & More
    National: 877.217.9870 *| *Cell: 740.707.2183
    Newsletter: Read Latest or Sign Up
    RSS Feed: Subscribe
    Buy Capture One at 10% off
    Personal Work

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    belgļe
    Posts
    1,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: recovering severely underexposed pics in C1?

    thank you, Doug!

    in this case, i think i'm kind of screwed... but it was a very interesting exercise playing around with the channels. i hope i've learned my lesson.

    luckily, i rarely screw up so badly (or at least realise what's going on sooner). that's what i get from not chimping, i suppose. silly me. the champagne and wine had nothing to do with it, i swear!

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    176
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: recovering severely underexposed pics in C1?

    Would a second treatment ( after C1 ) by Noise Ninja and the like help to alleviate the noise?
    Phil

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •