Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Photo Analysis
What to do in poorly lit rooms?
Page <prev 2 of 2
Sep 19, 2021 14:46:31   #
JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco
 
just.a.guy wrote:
Not making any criticism about this posting. Just some thoughts in general.
I want like to learn.

I just found this "room" and I assume it is different than images posted in the "Gallery".
I hope this is a place to learn from others. Where discussion can help add to each of our skills.
I just wonder, I am in the right place or is there another area just for (only) learning about composition
and editing?
----
I know there is no such thing as a right way to take photos. So suggestions, I expect, are all that are
offered. The subject is the image, composition and editing, never the person.

I prefer natural lighting. (my view point). I avoid flash - it changes the ambiance of what I am seeing.
Is there a way to take photos in dimly lit rooms without flash?

A lot of the photos I see today are over edited to make very impressive scenes.

Examples: replacing sky, or adding a near-by image that was not in the original shot, etc.
Certainly there is nothing wrong with cropping and straightening the image.

I assume the flash shots are original, without editing.
It is/would be nice if postings in this area include the original image in the post.
Or if the post is the original image (without editing) to state that fact.
To learn, I need to see the original and the edited versions.

Ugly Hedge Hog is a great place. I like the discussions. I just thought
it might be nice to have an area where new skills could be acquired,
that is just focused on the art of image composition and editing
( camera hardware has its place, but I hope it might be set aside in this part of the forum).

If this is not the right area let me know.
Not making any criticism about this posting. Just ... (show quote)


Don't be so fast to dismiss flash. Bounced flash gives very natural looking light, and allows higher shutter speeds, more depth of field, or lower ISO.

Reply
Sep 19, 2021 17:48:30   #
joecichjr Loc: Chicago S. Suburbs, Illinois, USA
 
[quote=Real Nikon Lover]
Johanna wrote:
I love taking pictures of haflas or belly dances. At one of the venues the lighting is fine for dinning but lousy for picture taking! Where have we heard that before? Anyway the last picture shows most of the room lighting. At least is fairly uniform but mixed colors.... quote]

Hope you don't mind... I dabbled with the lighting and eliminated a few distractions. My edits not perfect by any means. Perhaps you can try adjusting using your EV +/- You have a good lens so I would try and decrease ISO maybe to 800 and see what happens by adjusting with EV.
I love taking pictures of haflas or belly dances. ... (show quote)



Reply
Sep 19, 2021 19:07:43   #
TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC
 
JohnSwanda wrote:
Don't be so fast to dismiss flash. Bounced flash gives very natural looking light, and allows higher shutter speeds, more depth of field, or lower ISO.


Absolutely agree, but there are many times (restaurants, theaters, weddings in churches, plays, musical performances, parties, some indoor sporting events) where a flash is inappropriate and fast lenses and cameras that support High ISO/low noise are the answer.

Reply
 
 
Sep 20, 2021 11:12:13   #
just.a.guy
 
I taking the point that the image is already taken. I can't change that.
I understand that the moment of capture has a very important factor.
You can't make a silk purse out a pig's ear.

But given the image is already composed what can be done.

I am not a professional photographer. At 70+ I don't intend to be one.
Nor am I going to invest money in equipment. I see many opportunities
for better images (given the RAW image capability) to make the best
of what exists. Starting at that point what can be done, without over-doing it?

AI can learn to make better decisions aboout lighting and ISO. But what
do you do after the image exists? I find too much focus on equipment and
settings, with little mention about what happens after the image is created.
I hope this photo analysis section will discuss more about composition and
editing. Iphones while having some manual controls, most of us use the
automatic settings. We only have the image after it is taken with which to work.

Reply
Oct 8, 2021 12:48:26   #
boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander
 
Johanna wrote:
I love taking pictures of haflas or belly dances. At one of the venues the lighting is fine for dinning but lousy for picture taking! Where have we heard that before? Anyway the last picture shows most of the room lighting. At least is fairly uniform but mixed colors. I use a D850 with an f2:8 and 24 to 70mm lens. I’ve set the camera to self-determine color temperature, F2:8, 1/200 shutter speed to more or less stop action but still show some and let camera determine iso. That runs from about 4000 to over 8000!. I also use continues focusing.
I’ve tried back button focusing but I prefer using the normal take it button holding it half way to hold focus. The time available between takes to refocus is nil. I will also take bursts of up to ten exposures.
For editing I use ACDSee then first crop/rotate, adjust exposure, reduce noise then sharpen and store as jpeg. I could wish for better sharpening but then the image is not always that good.
I love taking pictures of haflas or belly dances. ... (show quote)


I don't see much wrong with any of them. Only a touch of softness at double download. That's probably motion blur. Higher shutter speed might help, or perhaps even more motion blurr to accentuate the movement. Next time try both

Reply
Oct 12, 2021 23:38:57   #
Alphabravo2020
 
1. I would increase the ISO. Going from your 6400 to 12800 or even higher is not a big deal on the D850.

2. I use a fast lens in low lighting. Going from f2.8 to f1.4 increases the incoming light by a factor of 4, potentially allowing you to increase shutter speed or decrease ISO by the same factor. There is plenty of light in the room.

The other added benefit of the faster lens is that the shallower depth of field will give you more separation between the subject and the background and might give a rather mundane background more character.

I would not use a flash in situations like this where I am an observer of a performance and not a designated photographer. It really isn't necessary with today's technology.

Unrelated, I would experiment with your white balance settings. Your photographs don't actually look bad but you might find a colder setting to improve the color representation. The warm yellow cast of incandescent lights can look monotonous, especially when you look at a bunch of photos at the same time.

Reply
Oct 13, 2021 18:14:37   #
Ninja01 Loc: Tampa, FL
 
The ceiling looks dark and it is covered with multicolored lamps; problematic for bounce flash. They probably wouldn't allow you to use it anyhow. Some of the blur I see is subject motion (#1) and it is appropriate for the subject. Very nice. #2 looks like the near hand is in focus, the knife a little soft and head OOF. Spot Reading could help that. #3 has two subjects so you need a smaller aperture for greater DOF. Your camera is built for low light shooting. Back illuminated sensor, no low-pass filter. High resolution and clarity. It's a good box. So here is something to try: boost your ISO to 15000 and don't worry about the noise; go higher if you need to. Shoot at f4 to 5.6 based on available light, and use 1/300 or higher shutter speed. Pick up more brightness in post if you need it. You can pick up a couple of stops in Lightroom without screwing up the balance. Correct light balance in Post. Give it a try and send a PM to let me know how you did.

Reply
 
 
Oct 18, 2021 12:25:25   #
flyboy61 Loc: The Great American Desert
 
Good responses and photos, given the equipment and venue. Actually, well done.
A question I have is what would the management/other customers' reaction to flash be? How would the management respond to a request to turn on all the interior lighting just during the performances?
A quality f/1.8 lens would provide some flexibility, but perhaps not the additional light to reduce the ISO much.
As for the nebensache, what is the subject? And what possible difference to a well-photographed subject would a "blown out" ceiling lamp or three make?

Reply
Oct 18, 2021 19:19:51   #
Alphabravo2020
 
Just to circle back to OPs original question.

He is asking if there are ways to reduce the noise in the image he has already taken. I went on a tangent myself but as far as I know, Topaz or PS denoise tools are the only methods I can think of. Also I guess if the image was saved as a reduced quality jpg then there will be anti-aliasing which might look like noise.

Nevermind, I can't find that now in OPs question.

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 2
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Photo Analysis
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.