High ISO and Grain - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

01/30/2004 11:42:10 AM · #1

Photo at ISO 3200

I have been experimenting with high ISO and grain. I would love to hear some feedback on that aspect of this photo.

sn4psh07

Canon EOS-10D

01/30/2004 11:46:28 AM · #2

For better grain use Grain Surgery... Problem with digital ISO grain is its always 1 pel in size hence uniform -- too artificial...

As for the picture good capture.

justine

Canon EOS-50D

01/30/2004 11:57:09 AM · #3

I don't mind that kind of grain John. In fact you see it in a lot of 'film' b&w shots. To me, it usually adds to the shots interest. After all Photoshop allows you to add noise-grain for depth.

Someone mentioned yesterday about little things in the National Geo. photos and how they would be voted down here.(tilted horizons, etc.)

I think often we are too quick to discount a shot for grain-noise. It's not always a bad thing as seen in your shot of the squirrel.
It's good to be flexible.

my 2 cents..and ya know what thats worth.

jxpfeer

Nikon D70

01/30/2004 12:10:37 PM · #4

i agree with justine, i believe in a b&w pic like that, the grain looks natural to the photo, after being used to seeing it in B&W photos for so long. i think it looks fine and wouldn't worry about it at all. now how much that grain affects a color image is another story, i'd be interested in seeing some of your ISO 3200 results in color.

great shot, btw! :)

GoodEnd

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

01/30/2004 12:41:35 PM · #5

I feel the plenty of artistic look in this picture. It canÂ´t be better in color. Only this grained look gives some special emotion to this picture. A clear sharp vivid color has a visual impact. A BW grained very well taked picture as this, gives a emotive impact. I canÂ´t explain this but itÂ´s what I feel when saw this. May be the next generations, that never sees a BW old printed photo donÂ´t feel this.

mhamilton

Sony DSC-F828

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX Aspherical DF for Canon

01/30/2004 12:42:05 PM · #6

Originally posted by justine:

I agree... Guess that is 4 cents now. ;-)

I love the shot, grain and all!

kaush

Olympus C-5060WZ

Carl Zeiss 35mm f2.4 Jena/Flektogon MC

01/30/2004 12:47:53 PM · #7

Originally posted by justine:

I don't mind that kind of grain John. In fact you see it in a lot of 'film' b&w shots. To me, it usually adds to the shots interest. After all Photoshop allows you to add noise-grain for depth.

In my pic for the 'All Alone" Challenge - Click Here
I used an ISO of 400 - to get the grainy effect - but no one liked it - what to do - different strokes for different folks.

Marjo

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

01/30/2004 01:11:31 PM · #8

I like the shot and the grain, but it seems like the average viewer/voter prefers a smooth look. Not enough time is spent really looking at the photo to appreciate just what was accomplished here.

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

01/30/2004 01:25:14 PM · #9

I like very much the idea of using grain artistically, it can really be an effective tool to set a mood, to recall an earlier time. Some shots just cry out for a bit of grain (or more than a bit).
I would rather shoot at low ISO and add grain in software than try to get it in-camera, at least with the Canons. I don't find that the noise introduced at high ISO on the Canon 10D & 300D is all that pleasing. The fixed-pattern noise on these cameras tends to produce horizontal bands that are very distracting, though random noise usually predominates at high ISO/high shutter speed combinations.
I'd rather have control over the amount of grain and the characteristics of the grain. Grain Surgery was mentioned above, it does seem to be the ultimate tool for this, though the $179 retail price seems out of whack for this product. I've not tried it, certainly would not buy it at that price. Anyone know of good, less expensive alternatives?

Pedro

Nikon D200

Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 VR DG IF-ED

01/30/2004 01:32:11 PM · #10

I would hazard a guess that the perception of the grain varies with people's perception of the intent of the photographer. Since we *know* john's a good fotog with a good camera, he must have done it on purpose, therefore we can appreciate the artistic value. when voting on a challenge, the question will come up: "is this grain intentional, or does this guy just not know how to light his subject properly?"

that's why the shots that fall 'outside the box' tend to languish in the challenges (note the absence of the term 'artsy' pictures).

My kid paints great abstracts that would sell for thousands...if he were picasso.

edit: /Pedro needs a spel chek

Message edited by author 2004-01-30 13:36:27.

Marjo

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

01/30/2004 01:34:30 PM · #11

Unintentional grain. Help or hurt the shot? Be brutally honest.

Azrifel

Fujifilm X100VI

01/30/2004 01:51:02 PM · #12

I don't like grain, cannot see anything artistically about it.

Spork99

OM System OM-1

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

01/30/2004 01:52:52 PM · #13

I like this shot and the graininess, but it doesn't look like film grain. Dunno if that was the effect you were looking for on not. Maybe adding grain in post processing would let you get a more "film" look to it.

01/30/2004 01:56:38 PM · #14

Originally posted by Azrifel:

I don't like grain, cannot see anything artistically about it.

This is OK too. I think this is probably a general consensus overall. I was hoping that someone would define for me what it is about grain that they like. Why is it that grain adds artistic value for some? I don't know either :)

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

01/30/2004 01:58:33 PM · #15

Originally posted by jmsetzler:

Originally posted by Azrifel:
I don't like grain, cannot see anything artistically about it.

This is OK too. I think this is probably a general consensus overall. I was hoping that someone would define for me what it is about grain that they like. Why is it that grain adds artistic value for some? I don't know either :)

For me it isn't a like it or not thing - grain can add texture where a clean image might lack that tactile quality. Some times this enhances and other times it gets in the way. Grain can also artifically enhance the contrast in a scene, giving it some more punch. I've heard of pros who use digital shooting at ISO 200 or higher for that added effect in their shots, rather than any need for higher shutter speeds.

Message edited by author 2004-01-30 13:59:50.

Canon EF 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 II USM

01/30/2004 02:04:24 PM · #16

The funny thing about grain is that it was never intended as an 'added value' to any print. It was just a product of the limitations of technology at the time.

orussell

Canon EOS Rebel T6s

01/30/2004 02:14:52 PM · #17

I'm not really a fan of grain per se, but I think in the shot of the squirrel it gives more dimension to the depth of field.

Marjo

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

01/30/2004 02:16:54 PM · #18

That's what I'm trying to figure out, too. When looking at older photos in family albums, it was always said, "That would be a great photo, too bad it's grainy." After putting in some time trying to clean it up with software you came to the realization that it was a great photo with the grain and the grain added to the authenticity. So...is the grain added to photos today to achieve that antiquated look? Are there other applications?

Spork99

OM System OM-1

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

01/30/2004 02:17:01 PM · #19

When shooting film, I would push ISO 400 B&W (Tri-X Pan or TMax) film to ISO 3200 or 6400. Images would look almost like sand paintings when printed at 8x10. Sometimes, that was the only way to get an image at all.

soup

Canon EOS-30D

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

01/30/2004 02:29:31 PM · #20

what do you mean it was the only way to get a image at all?

because of light conditions?

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Sometimes, that was the only way to get an image at all.

in certain instances i think grain adds to a photo - to give a rock solid answer as to when exactly, i cant.
but zeuszen has some decent BW's with grain in my mind.

casualguy

Canon EOS-20D

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

01/30/2004 02:39:26 PM · #21

Originally posted by Pedro:

I think the responses to Johns post illustrates the kind of respect he has earned. He posted a shot to get opinions and we assume that he (John) must like the shot and the 'grain look', but actually (by the sound of it) it is to the contrary.

Spork99

OM System OM-1

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

01/30/2004 02:45:52 PM · #22

Originally posted by soup:

what do you mean it was the only way to get a image at all?

because of light conditions?

Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Sometimes, that was the only way to get an image at all.

in certain instances i think grain adds to a photo - to give a rock solid answer as to when exactly, i cant.
but zeuszen has some decent BW's with grain in my mind.

Yeah, in very low light where you can't use flash like street photography at night or the occasional surveillance job. The effect itself is kind of interesting too in some cases.

Message edited by author 2004-01-30 14:47:38.