Golden Rule Loc: Washington State

I have a Nikon D5100 , Nikon 24-70mm lens, 1/125, f/4, ISO 640. Image is still underexposed and the photo is already compromised with noise so I'm afraid to go to a higher ISO or slow shutter speed because of moving subject. I also didn't want to open aperture more with concerns over lack of focus over a wider area. Most of my images were very noisy and ended up out of focus anyway due to camera movement or subject movement. I used two softboxes but that obviously was not enough light. I'm frustrated with my images and it may simply be lack of knowledge on lower light shoots and knowing how to set my shots up. Help anyone? Many thanks to all of your knowledgeable insight.

orignal image

(Download)

lightroom post processing

(Download)

St3v3M Loc: 35,000 feet

Original Image EXIF Data

Date Time Original: 2015:08:09 16:32:22
Date Time Digitized: 2015:08:09 16:32:22
Exposure Time: 1/125
F Number: f / 4
Exposure Program: Manual
ISO Speed Ratings: 640
Shutter Speed Value: 6.97
Aperture Value: 4
Max Aperture Value: 3
Metering Mode: Pattern
Light Source: Unknown
Flash: Flash did not fire
Focal Length: 48mm
Sensing Method: One-chip color area sensor
Exposure Mode: 1
White Balance: Auto white balance
Digital Zoom Ration: 1
Focal Length In 35mm Film: 72mm
Make: NIKON CORPORATION
Model: NIKON D5100
Software: Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.7 (Windows)
LensInfo: 240/10 700/10 28/10 28/10
LensModel: 24.0-70.0 mm f/2.8
Lens: 24.0-70.0 mm f/2.8

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

Hmmm. Are you saying you used Softboxes with a Constant light source not Flash/Strobe? Were whatever lights you used set to their brightest setting? You likely just need more light on the subject. I am a bit confused about an ISO of 640 producing excessive noise. You should be able to get a "clean" exposure to at least ISO 800. Say bump the shutter speed to 1/200 sec. With VR on (hand-held?) and using a focal length of 48-50mm you should be able to get a good exposure. Try opening / removing the front screen from the softboxes and go with harsher light to get more light. After all cats and flowers are "soft" and not reflective glass or metal. You might also try not using AWB but set the white balance to the light actually used.

This one image that you posted is not bad. Yes, the first image is under exposed. I reprocessed it and came up with something similar to your second, processed image. I did not play with it long so mine is cooler (should be warmed), more contrasty (is better). But the sharpness is not much different. Did you shoot it as a jpg or Raw? Your initial image seems, yes, a bit soft, but I was able to sharpen it up OK to be like your second. You do know that Raw images MUST be processed and adjusted for sharpness, exposure, contrast, color balance, etc.

Over all it is not a bad image at all, but (1) the Cat needs a bit more light on it (1/2 to 1 stop), (2) the background needs to be much lighter or darker to give more separation from the cat. (3) and the background needs to be neutral (gray or Black), that green cast looks terrible to me. I could just Photoshop it to black or gray.

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

in addition, your "...lack of focus...", more correct as "...loss of Depth of Field...". Personally I would have found a way to shoot at f/5.6 to get fewer soft plants. But it actually would not look good to me with razor sharp foliage.

And that is a beautiful Cat, yours?

Joecosentino Loc: Whitesboro, New York

When you meter use spot metering on the cat. How faraway are your softboxes light falls off quickly. What are you using, spotlights, strobes?

I have a feeling you metered off the white fur

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

That is just an excellent scene to practice with! And that type of work requires practice to be able to realize what you can try doing to improve it. Note that even with lots of practice you'll still want to "work a scene" like that, trying several different approaches while shooting and then later pick out which worked best.

First, a D5100 can shoot with ISO as high as 3200 and still get minimal noise. Not no noise, just not much. But ISO 1600 can be almost totally noiseless, and at ISO 800 you really don't have to have any noise. The trick in every case is getting maximum exposure, and then setting the black point just above the noise floor. At ISO 3200 you'll only get about 5 stops of dynamic range, so while the noise will be acceptable the resulting image is going to have high contrast. At ISO 1600 you'll get just over 6 stops of dynamic range, and at ISO 800 better than 7 stops (which is probably about all that your monitor can display anyway).

When shooting you want to watch the histogram and the blinking highlight display. If there are parts of the scene that can be washed out without making any difference, let them be over exposed! In your picture, as an example, the brightest area is that pink flower just to the right of the cat's head. But you don't care about detail in that flower, so it can be over exposed. The next brightest area is in the white fur on the cat's neck, and that is the area to set at just below clipping! Set exposure to where the flower is blinking and the cat's fur is not.

I like the f/4 aperture. I would have shot a few at ISO 800 and certain ISO 1600, with maybe a couple at ISO 3200.

But the big thing is that a slower shutter speed just wouldn't be a problem. If the cat moves, the picture is blurred. The cat moving is not the picture you were out to get! That particular image, shot at 1/125 and nearly 2 stops under exposed, could have even been shot at 1/30 if you are good at hand holding technique. If not, a monopod or a tripod would have helped.

But shooting at 1/80, f/4, with ISO at 1250 or 1600 would have solved the exposure problem, and that would fix the noise if the image is processed correctly.


Well, you could use more light! The Exif data says the light value was 8.3 EV. Not exactly blinding. But consider that most really good gymnasiums are about 7 EV, and many high schools gyms are between 6 and 7, while older gyms might be less that 5 EV. And people still get good shots shooting events and sports.

The main thing is getting the exposure up where the brightest values in areas you want to have good detail are just below clipping. Allow highlights that don't need detail to clip. And of course shoot in RAW mode, and do not edit JPEG images. It appears (but might not be) that you generated the first image using the RAW converter, and then edited that image to get the second image. Don't do that! If you save it as an intermediate file use TIFF and never JPEG.

When doing the RAW conversion watch the histogram, and set brightness, contrast, and the black point correctly. You don't want to change them more than very slightly in any editing done later. It is by getting them right at that point that you produce an image with more "pop" and less noise. Technically what happens is simply maximizing use of the available dynamic range by clipping highlights where detail is not needed and blocking shadows with too much noise.

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

Ok...question:

What was in your softboxes?

Continous light?

Speedlight?

How did you determine that you needed to set the camera to the settings noted by you above? Did you guess?

How did you determine that the lighting power and distance was correct or not?

Golden Rule Loc: Washington State

I love you guys !!!! I will answer the above replies when I get home to the lighting and everything I used. I did a quick shoot at ISO 1600 and was pleasantly surprised at the results in just natural window light. You were right about a higher ISO didn't produce as much noise as I thought it would even 100% magnified.

original natural light

(Download)

lightroom post process

(Download)

Golden Rule Loc: Washington State

That is a guess. I'm a beginner at this lighting. The 2 softboxes (20"x 27") don't seem to put out enough light so I will try taking the covers off.

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

As I said in the PM. Your lights are very underpowered and you kept them a LONG way from the cat.

Put them very close...even 1 foot or 18" away....don't be afraid to get them close!

Your camera settings are ok just move the light source closer.

I hate to bring this up but I'll keep recommending this until the cows come home.

I'd suggest buying an inexpensive incident light meter. It takes the guess work out of all of this; no monkeying around, no guessing.

You put the cat on the table.

You hit the light meter button.

It tells you what your camera settings should be.

You set them

you take a picture.


Easy Peasy.

And in the process...you LEARN A LOT.

It takes something that seems mysterious and turns it into a number: "1 foot away with my softbox always gives me f/4 at ISO 400 and 1/125 shutter speed."

After a while of duplicating this set up, you will guess correctly almost all of the time because the meter always gives you a real number, not a guess.

Psergel Loc: New Mexico

I have little experience with off camera flash so this may be a really dumb question.
How does one trigger an off camera flash and get "flash did not fire" in the EXIF data?

ronz Loc: Florida

Suggest you get the light closer and not quite sure why you need 1/125 if he is posing like it appears. Eyes and nose are in good focus which is what we shoot for mostly in portraits. Try getting the lights about 3 ft from the subject and lower SS.

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

I've noticed that too on all my cameras. I think "Flash Fired" only shows up if you shoot on AUTOMATIC. It is a mystery to me too. :?

daddybear Loc: Brunswick, NY

A little off topic but the light meter brought I up. I had an early appointment at my lung transplant hospital in NYC for my four year tests. Plan was.out by noon run down to B & H and buy a light meter and other goodies in the candy store. You guessed it . Every procedure ran very late. No time left to go downtown. Oh well, it is only 160 miles away.

Daddybear

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

I do not know the level of expertise of the original poster but I do know that using spot metering requires certain skills.
Yes, spot metering from the cat will do but being the size of the spot that of the focus bracket the angle of acceptance varies from one camera to the next one. I would check my angle of acceptance first.
Now if the metering is done from the bright part of the cat, the white fur then at least the reading should be overexposed by 1 stop. If from the dark side it calls for 2 stops underexposure from meter reading.
All this can be obviated by using an incident meter placed in front of the cat.