Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2017/06/23
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Bob, when I need to reduce the noise in images, I turn to Neat Image. It requires some experimentation, but works if the amount of reduction is kept to a low level. I think there is a trial version still available. I have used it as a stand alone tool, and currently have it as a plugin in Photoshop CC. Jim Nichols Tullahoma, TN USA On 6/23/2017 11:14 AM, Robert Adler wrote: > Hi Howard, > Thank you for this workflow of yours. It's very helpful and much > appreciated. > I will send you the raw file using the 12,500 ISO. I'd be very curious if > you have more luck removing the noise. I'm going to play with the DxO noise > program today to see how that works. Noise can be the killer of an image: > this one is borderline. The NIK Dfine is not working anymore for me and is > discontinued. I'd love to remove noise in CC, but I don't really understand > how to do it: hit and miss. This despite reading tons about it. > Thanks again and appreciate your expertise. > Best, > Bob > > > Bob Adler > www.robertadlerphotography.com > *"Capturing Light One Frame At A Time"* > > On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 8:49 AM, Howard L Ritter Jr <hlritter at twc.com> > wrote: > >> That?s a very nice capture of the region towards the center of the Galaxy, >> Bob. And even expanding the image on my screen, I don?t see any bothersome >> noise. There?s virtually none in the dark regions of the hills, and the >> mottling in the lake and the sky I think is primarily due to the >> innumerable stars. In any case, the SL?s performance at ISO 12500 is >> impressive. That region is my favorite binocular target, and now that I?ve >> discovered how to nearly eliminate the effects of light pollution in my >> suburban sky, and begun to do sky imaging, it will be a target for that as >> well. >> >> I don?t recall whether you mentioned seeing them when I first posted them, >> but I took some similar shots of the Southern Hemisphere Milky Way from >> Australia in April. I took them with a Nikon D810A (the astrophotography >> model with the less IR-restrictive sensor cover plate) and the Nikon >> 14-24mm zoom at 14mm or the 24-85mm zoom at 50 or 85mm. The shots with the >> zoom were done with the camera on a tracking device to avoid star >> trailing. >> I used ISOs of 1600-6400. >> >> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/hlritter/Gallery_001/ < >> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/hlritter/Gallery_001/> >> >> I stretched the histogram of my images in PS by moving the white-point >> slider to brighten the stars and the black-point slider to darken the >> background sky, then fiddled with both, plus the grey-point slider, to get >> the effect I wanted. To get rid of vignetting, I also applied a flat-field >> correction frame that I took in daylight with a couple of layers of white >> T-shirt over the lens, and the camera aimed away from the sun at a sunlit >> scene, and then converted to greyscale. I think my images as posted are a >> bit hyper-real, but that?s a goal of photographing any celestial targets >> other than the bright moon and planets. In any case, they carry the flavor >> of the visual impact of seeing the Southern Milky Way and the Magellanic >> Clouds, for the first time, from the deep darkness of rural Australia. The >> left side of the region of the MW that I imaged adjoins on the right your >> region of the MW at the dense star cloud in the center of your first >> image. >> The very different orientation of the MW is what happens when your >> viewpoint is rotated 65 degrees clockwise! >> >> Did you do any post-processing of these images? They have the look of raw >> images to me. If so, I?d be interested to see what the result of a >> histogram stretch might be. Would you mind sharing the raw file with me so >> I can play a little? I?ve added a couple of the raw images to my album so >> you can see the difference post-processing makes. >> >> It?s possible to see very short star trails by enlarging your images. The >> rule of thumb is that they won?t be easily noticeable if the exposure time >> is not more than 300 sec divided by the FL in mm, so your 20-sec exposures >> at 24mm are pushing it. If you?re going to do much of this sort of thing, >> a >> camera tracker can be had for about the price of 2 or 3 SL batteries? ? >> Some of my images were exposed for longer than the rule of 300, which is >> possible when the region being imaged is well away from the celestial >> equator, where the stars move fastest. >> >> (Pardon me if I?m telling you things you already know!) >> >> ?howard >> >> >>> On Jun 21, 2017, at 5:28 PM, Robert Adler <rgacpa at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Last night I went up to Silver Lake in the Sierras. It's at about 7,800' >>> elevation. I went to see how the SL with the SL24-90mm would work with >>> Milky Way photography. The two images were taken at 12,500 ISO @ 24mm, >>> f/2.8 with a 20second exposure. I shot from 10:30pm until 3:00am... >>> >>> Though there is a lot of noise, I don't find it distracting. The drama of >>> the center of our galaxy seems to outweigh any noise issues. Please click >>> on the image to make it larger to fit your screen: >>> >>> http://www.robertadlerphotography.com/p133735760/h8e052599#h8e052599 >>> >>> I would appreciate others' opinions as to whether or not they find the >>> noise distasteful or does it look more like film grain. The images were >>> post processed in Capture 1. >>> >>> Thanks for any opinions in advance, >>> Bob >>> >>> >>> Bob Adler >>> www.robertadlerphotography.com >>> *"Capturing Light One Frame At A Time"* >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >