# Ugh... so irritated... noise in pics? *pictures*



## paniologal (Sep 5, 2011)

Hi everyone 

So I'm getting so frustrated with my camera right now that sometimes I want to cry or chuck it out the window. It wouldn't be such a big deal if I wasn't starting to do photography professionally for people. The photos frequently turn out grainy and I can't figure out why. I know it has to do with light (or lack of) and that using a tripod with lower ISO would help, but I'm doing corporate photography where a tripod wouldn't really be ideal to use. I'm going to post a few sample photos so you can see where I'm coming from.

So, the first ones were taken at the same time and location as the second set. That's why I'm so confused as to why some pics are grainy and the others aren't. The first ones were taken a few months ago. 












And the ones from tonight (5pm-6:30pm)











The close up ones came out fine, all of them:






And the point and shoot did better than the expensive DSLR :roll:







I have many more pics I can post if anyone needs more examples. Granted, I probably shouldn't have taken pics with the sun behind the subject like it was but even when I put them where the sun was behind my back they still turned out grainy - and dark. I was thinking it was my fault but I'm starting to wonder if it may be the lens. We've had problems with it lately but, as the heart picture shows, it can also take immaculate photos. I have the Nikon D70 and plan to upgrade in the future soon but I have a feeling this is more user error than camera error. The lighting was horrific today. There was a dark rain cloud on one side of the sky and a really bright sky on the other. But I can't imagine why out of two hours of shooting not one turned out perfect. How can I prevent this in the future? Would an external flash have made a night and day difference or no? I don't mind paying more money for good equipment, but I don't want to spend mega bucks and still have my photography turn out this way. 

Thanks for the feedback everyone!

EDIT: You'll probably have to make the pictures bigger to see the grain/noise, but I promise it's there.


----------



## ann (Sep 5, 2011)

Underexposure increase grain. Most of these all suffer from this problem.

I would agree it is user error not the camera. You need to learn to meter more effectively and how to deal with various lighting conditions. Photography is all about light and form, not cameras. The camera is just a tool that will perform at a high level if we use it correctly.


----------



## Triple A (Sep 5, 2011)

Yes, an external flash would help. It will take time and practice to learn how to balance the subject and background, but your pictures will look better. And I don't know if you shoot in jpeg, but if you do, try shooting in raw. Raw files respond much better to PP. What editing software do you have?


----------



## ann (Sep 5, 2011)

RAW is a great tool and very useful, but it is not meant to rescue badly exposed images, it can only do so much.

Software can make a good photo better, a great photo , fantastic, but it can't make .......... good.


----------



## The_Traveler (Sep 5, 2011)

Here's some of what you are doing to increase color noise.

Shooting a backlit subject against a bright sky and the color noise is greater in shadows.
Underexposing.
Using a very small f stop - f16 - when you could open up significantly and have much more lattitude in speed.
Using a 5 generations past sensor, the D70, which is not known for great sensor response in underexposure situations.
It doesn't show ISO but my guess it wasn't 200

Corporate work may not allow a tripod but a monopod would be fine.
You are shooting at 1/500 with a 28 mm lens that could be easily handheld with good sharpness that would allow you to shoot at 1/100 with a low iso and proper exposure and relatively no color noise.


----------



## Triple A (Sep 5, 2011)

ann said:


> RAW is a great tool and very useful, but it is not  meant to rescue badly exposed images, it can only do so much.
> 
> Software can make a good photo better, a great photo , fantastic, but it can't make .......... good.




I wasn't suggesting that the OP just shoot and fix everything PP. Obviously you should shoot it right to begin with, but if he's going to shoot in low light at high ISO w/o a tripod or a flash, then he'll be able to salvage underexposed photos better using RAW files.


----------



## paniologal (Sep 5, 2011)

Thanks for the replies everyone.

I know I need to learn a lot more about shooting photos and lighting situations, but the pictures I got are just not acceptable. I've shot under the same exact conditions but the photos weren't nearly this bad. No matter how bad I did they should have a better result... like I said, the point and shoot did better than the D90. I kept it on automatic most of the time, however, I also opened up the f stop and the results were no better. I agree with the posters who said there would be little reason to shoot in RAW. You can't make a bad picture good, though I've been trying. I will try experimenting with RAW to see how it works though.

Any more tips would be appreciated. I'm still thinking it's the lens. It has been having a lot of problems and the bigger lens gives much better results even under the same conditions.


----------



## The_Traveler (Sep 5, 2011)

paniologal said:


> Any more tips would be appreciated. I'm still thinking it's the lens. It has been having a lot of problems and the bigger lens gives much better results even under the same conditions.



No, it isn't the lens.  It is, to be blunt, that you don't seem to know what you are doing.


----------



## paniologal (Sep 5, 2011)

The_Traveler said:


> paniologal said:
> 
> 
> > Any more tips would be appreciated. I'm still thinking it's the lens. It has been having a lot of problems and the bigger lens gives much better results even under the same conditions.
> ...



Considering I haven't even started college yet that could very well be the case. I'm taking a photography course this fall. I'm not saying the lens is low quality and I'm not blaming it. It's actually a very good quality lens. But it's BROKEN. That's a proven fact; the CPU connectors are broken and none of the connections were working correctly last night. When connected, it sometimes acts like a non CPU lens and the F-- blinks at the top, and it won't even shoot unless it's in manual mode. That's not causing the noise directly but it was messing it up to some degree - it went from working one minute to not working the next. I bought a cleaner/lubricant that seemed to fix the problem but it stopped working once I got to the destination site. I'm not saying a working lens doesn't have the ability to shoot low-noise photos, but since this one is not working correctly, it's not consistent. And for everyone saying I should use low ISO - I would, but since most of my photography includes moving images and backgrounds (such as a crashing wave and lots of candid shots) lowering the ISO is not the best option for me, even with a tripod. 

"Using a 5 generations past sensor, _*the D70*, which* is not known for great sensor response in underexposure situations."*_

Does this not suggest the camera/sensor was at least part of the problem? 

So, considering I had my f-stop open to about 4(in some of the pictures, though not all), and the pictures still turned out noisy, and I can't use a much lower ISO, what are my options? 

Sorry to come across as argumentative.


----------



## Destin (Sep 5, 2011)

Using a d90 on auto mode is like putting a toddler behind the wheel of a Ferrari. You just aren't going to get good performance out of it that way. 

You need to learn about the exposure triangle, and many other elements of photography. 

As far as raw files... I refuse to shoot in jpeg anymore, because with raw files you simply keep your options open more, and it preserves greater detail in your photos, giving you more control over your final outcome.


----------



## paniologal (Sep 5, 2011)

Destin said:


> As far as raw files... I refuse to shoot in jpeg anymore, because with raw files you simply keep your options open more, and it preserves greater detail in your photos, giving you more control over your final outcome.



Thanks for the info! I definitely want to try shooting in RAW next time. I'm curious to see how they would turn out.


----------



## jritz (Sep 5, 2011)

Hate to say it, but you have no business doing pro photography with your level of knowledge...


----------



## The_Traveler (Sep 5, 2011)

Rent stuff, borrow stuff or don't do the work.
If your equipment is faulty, don't do the work.
If you can't take the responsibility for doing a good job, don't do the work.


----------



## paniologal (Sep 5, 2011)

jritz said:


> Hate to say it, but you have no business doing pro photography with your level of knowledge...



If I must post all the wonderful testimonials and reviews from countless people who say my photos are better than those who have been in their profession for years, I will, but that seems a little unnecessary.


----------



## paniologal (Sep 5, 2011)

The_Traveler said:


> Rent stuff, borrow stuff or don't do the work.
> If your equipment is faulty, don't do the work.
> If you can't take the responsibility for doing a good job, don't do the work.



I mentioned to the clients my lens wasn't working correctly and that I wouldn't charge for the photo shoot, but they didn't mind. I'm working at a professional photography studio now who I'm hoping to borrow equipment from them. I'm getting a new lens as soon as I get back from vacation.


----------



## jritz (Sep 5, 2011)

I'm just stating that by the pictures you posted, charging people for mediocre photos is probably not the best idea.  The pictures you posted above have nothing to with a problem with a lens, they have to do with the fact that this need flash fill to light the subjects facial features (mainly the eyes).  Also, if you knew the exposure triangle you would know that f/16 is not ideal this situation to help keep your iso to the lowest setting possible.  Learning the basics of your camera and how to expose whether it be through proper metering or adding flash for fill are necessary tools in being a pro photographer.  I just think your getting ahead of yourself and are already backpedaling and making excuses for your photos.


----------



## paniologal (Sep 5, 2011)

I usually only charge $25/ hour, with no obligation of buying the photos. I am seriously thinking about refunding the couple last night because the photos were awful - mediocre would be a compliment for the ones I took last night. The pictures I posted are some of my worst ones. But, as I said, I was taking photos at f/4 and the results were the same. There's no excuse. I did awful - it was my lack of knowledge, I know that. I should have been better prepared with a lens that was functional and had an external flash. I'm not going to do another photo shoot until I have the proper equipment. I'm also going to read my camera's manual cover to cover.


----------



## MTVision (Sep 5, 2011)

RAW files look worse than JPEGS so be aware. JPEGS have been processed in camera whereas you have to process all RAW files. Great thing about RAW is you can change your WB after the fact. 

Friendly advice: even though you are only charging 25.00/hr maybe you should hold off on the business part of photography. You admitted that you are lacking some basic fundamental knowledge - so instead of trying to make money with OK pictures you should learn your craft inside and out. Then create a business. I have no doubts that people love your pictures but that is besides the point. Being able to take nice pictures isn't all there is to photography.


----------



## paniologal (Sep 5, 2011)

MTVision said:


> RAW files look worse than JPEGS so be aware. JPEGS have been processed in camera whereas you have to process all RAW files. Great thing about RAW is you can change your WB after the fact.
> 
> Friendly advice: even though you are only charging 25.00/hr maybe you should hold off on the business part of photography. You admitted that you are lacking some basic fundamental knowledge - so instead of trying to make money with OK pictures you should learn your craft inside and out. Then create a business. I have no doubts that people love your pictures but that is besides the point. Being able to take nice pictures isn't all there is to photography.



Thanks for the heads up. I think I will hold off for a little while.. do some photo shoots with friends and experiment more, maybe take some classes, get the right equipment, then start back up again with my business.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Sep 5, 2011)

paniologal said:


> I usually only* charge $25/ hour*, with no obligation of buying the photos. I am seriously thinking about refunding the couple last night because the photos were awful - mediocre would be a compliment for the ones I took last night. The pictures I posted are some of my worst ones. But, as I said, I was taking photos at f/4 and the results were the same. There's no excuse. I did awful - it was my lack of knowledge, I know that. I should have been better prepared with a lens that was functional and had an external flash. I'm not going to do another photo shoot until I have the proper equipment. I'm also going to read my camera's manual cover to cover.


----------



## paniologal (Sep 5, 2011)

2WheelPhoto said:


> paniologal said:
> 
> 
> > I usually only* charge $25/ hour*, with no obligation of buying the photos. I am seriously thinking about refunding the couple last night because the photos were awful - mediocre would be a compliment for the ones I took last night. The pictures I posted are some of my worst ones. But, as I said, I was taking photos at f/4 and the results were the same. There's no excuse. I did awful - it was my lack of knowledge, I know that. I should have been better prepared with a lens that was functional and had an external flash. I'm not going to do another photo shoot until I have the proper equipment. I'm also going to read my camera's manual cover to cover.



I don't know if you're surprised because that's too much or not enough, but even the worst photographers in my area charge 200/hour.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Sep 5, 2011)

Too much for snapshots, by far!


----------



## paniologal (Sep 5, 2011)

2WheelPhoto said:


> Too much for snapshots, by far!



Actually, in my area, people charge a lot for photos to be taken - and people pay it too! Usually I get a generous tip and people have said I'm under charging. But thank you for the input.

If anyone has any interest, here's my site: http://www.wix.com/paniologal/libsphotography

The rates on there aren't the true rates as of now though. I do my 'special' - 25 dollars.


----------



## ann (Sep 6, 2011)

"Thanks for the heads up. I think I will hold off for a little while.. do some photo shoots with friends and experiment more, maybe take some classes, get the right equipment, then start back up again with my business."

Your best statement , take it very seriously especially the practice part.  I would also suggest start studying about lighting and the exposure triangle.


----------



## bazooka (Sep 6, 2011)

The images are noisy because you are shooting ISO 800, compared to the first two shots are at ISO 200.  Opening your aperture didn't help any because that just adjusted your shutter speed.  You have your ISO set statically.


----------



## spacefuzz (Sep 6, 2011)

Read your manual and a book on natural light / flash portrait photography. Make yourself a page of notes based on various lighting conditions. 
Go get an understanding friend, go to the beach and shoot all afternoon evening doing your best to tweak via the histogram and lcd preview. Then go home and spend several hours being brutally honest about how well you really did. Make more notes about what you did well at, and more importantly what you need to improve. 
Then go back the next day and do it again (very understanding friend). Repeat until you can read the light and set up your equipment on the fly.


----------



## bennielou (Sep 6, 2011)

Libs,

I think people have told you the truth here.  And for $25 bucks a session, that seems like a fair rate.

But I also saw on your site that you offer wedding and sports events, etc.  I don't know how to say this, but you just ARE NOT READY for that yet.  And I'm not judging by this post, but your own portfolio.  They are very consistantly exposed incorrectly.  And that is about the only thing that is consistant.

You can list all the people that adore your photos till the cows come home, but the simple fact is that had you known the very basics you could have pulled off this shoot.

Now, it's not all bad news:  People seem to like you, so you have that going for you.  $25 per session seems alright, because they know at that price point it's a crapshoot.  I just think you have a lot more work ahead of you before you are ready to tell people that you are better than most of the pros out there.


----------



## Josh220 (Sep 6, 2011)

IMO you should learn how to properly use your equipment before you charge people. This type of question should be nonexistent if you are profiting from your work. As of now, your shots are underexposed snapshots, NOT portraits. Here's an example of a quick shot I took of myself and my girlfriend on our trip to Maui this summer:








I do not feel that mine is professional quality, nor would I feel comfortable charging for this work. Keep that in mind when charging for your images when comparing the quality of your shots to mine and others.

I am not trying to bag on you in any way, and you shouldn't be discouraged. But I would suggest picking up some books, reading more on the forum, practicing with your friends, saving for better equipment including some off camera lighting, etc. Paying clients are not how you should practice, you should have everything down perfectly before charging.


----------



## bennielou (Sep 6, 2011)

paniologal said:


> Thanks for the replies everyone.
> 
> I know I need to learn a lot more about shooting photos and lighting situations, but the pictures I got are just not acceptable. I've shot under the same exact conditions but the photos weren't nearly this bad. No matter how bad I did they should have a better result... like I said, the point and shoot did better than the D90. I kept it on automatic most of the time, however, I also opened up the f stop and the results were no better. I agree with the posters who said there would be little reason to shoot in RAW. You can't make a bad picture good, though I've been trying. I will try experimenting with RAW to see how it works though.
> 
> Any more tips would be appreciated. I'm still thinking it's the lens. It has been having a lot of problems and the bigger lens gives much better results even under the same conditions.



It's NOT your lens.  This is user error, plain and simple.  Shooting backlit subject requires a bit of finess from even the best of the bunch.  What you had here was a crappy time of day, too much backlighting, no off camera lighting, and a heaping helping of "beginnerness".  This could have been done very easily with knowledge of the camera and lighting, even if it was just natural lighting.

First you blamed the photos on noise (in the title), and then you switched it to your lens.  Stop blaming the poor lens.  It's not the lens.  And you wouldn't have excessive noise if you hadn't shot 3 stops under.  

There is no shame in taking a time out to reaccess yourself and your work.  Go back to the chalkboard, and I'm sure you can get there.  But for today, you are miles away (and barefoot on broken glass) from being there.  :-(


----------



## bennielou (Sep 6, 2011)

paniologal said:


> 2WheelPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > paniologal said:
> ...



Guess what?  I could charge a million dollars an hour.  Will I get it?  Well that's the million dollar question, isn't it?


----------



## gsgary (Sep 6, 2011)

paniologal said:


> The_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> > paniologal said:
> ...



A good tradesman never blames his tools, you need to learn how to use it  to it's best i still use my old 1Dmk1 which have a similar sensor to  yours and was renown for being bad with high ISO's but if you know how  to use it to its best it is not that bad 
Here's a shot from a few years ago shot at ISO1600, your camera will get  much better results if your use it properly the exif say you shot in  Auto


----------



## bennielou (Sep 6, 2011)

Auto......that explains it.

Libs, the camera is judging the overall scene, which was backlit.  So it compensated by making everything dark.  Had you simply shot in Manual mode, as the photo above, all would have been fine.

This is further proof of why you should never let your camera's brain go before yours.  It can only guess.  That is why your brain needs the info to tell IT what it needs to do for you.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Sep 6, 2011)

This all comes down to an inexperienced camera owner pretending to be a professional photographer when she clearly is in way over her head. She has not learned the very basic skills required to charge anyone.  Buy a book, stop making excuses and learn "how" light works.  Might not be a bad idea to learn how to focus manualy, just in case the auto pilot on your lens stops working again.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Sep 6, 2011)

paniologal said:


> jritz said:
> 
> 
> > Hate to say it, but you have no business doing pro photography with your level of knowledge...
> ...




OMG! 


This thread is GOLD!


How did I miss it?


Please continue!


----------



## niftydriftyprod (Sep 6, 2011)

check your iso for the grain. and maybe your wb to get better colors.


----------



## KmH (Sep 7, 2011)

paniologal said:


> I mentioned to the clients my lens wasn't working correctly and that I wouldn't charge for the photo shoot, but they didn't mind. I'm working at a professional photography studio now who I'm hoping to borrow equipment from them. I'm getting a new lens as soon as I get back from vacation.



Your business ethics suck.


----------



## paniologal (Sep 20, 2011)

Wow, I can't believe this thread is still on the first page. It's surprising how many people don't seem to have much else to do except telling others their photography knowledge sucks on the Internet! But, as for me, I have been practicing with aperture, shutter speed, and a little ISO, talking to pros about what they feel is the problem, and keeping the camera off automatic at all times. I also shot in RAW, and I liked it, but I am going to continue shooting in JPEG for awhile. Or JPEG/RAW. 

Sooo.... here are some photos I took of my horse today. None are perfect. But, I feel like I have made some improvement. All photos are straight out of the camera, no editing. The last is RAW, and is (obviously) edited. I mostly did that for fun. And I really do appreciate those who actually gave me tips on how to improve my photography - that's the reason I joined the forum! I hope you guys can give more feedback.


----------



## ndwgolf (Sep 20, 2011)

The_Traveler said:


> paniologal said:
> 
> 
> > Any more tips would be appreciated. I'm still thinking it's the lens. It has been having a lot of problems and the bigger lens gives much better results even under the same conditions.
> ...


 Agree.........plus NEVER shoot in Auto
Below picture shot at 6400 ISO and hand held without flash


----------



## joealcantar (Sep 20, 2011)

Is it possible you are shooting with *AUTO ISO *on?  I don't have this camera but believe this camera has this option and could be affecting settings. 
-
Shoot well, Joe


----------



## paniologal (Sep 20, 2011)

Hi Joe,

I was shooting on automatic the day of the shoot, so the auto ISO was on. Now I am shooting manual, on 200 ISO currently.


----------



## joealcantar (Sep 20, 2011)

paniologal said:


> Hi Joe,
> 
> I was shooting on automatic the day of the shoot, so the auto ISO was on. Now I am shooting manual, on 200 ISO currently.


-
I would stay away from the Auto ISO setting and try to stay in contol.  Bright backgrounds etc. are tough to meter at first and don't rely on your camera to meter it correctly.  Learn how to do it in Manual as you are doing that way if all else fails you can get the image you want. 
-
Shoot well, Joe


----------

