Post processing...

oO Stevie Oo

oO Stevie Oo

oO Stevie Oo

Associate
Joined
6 Nov 2010
Posts
887
Location
Behind the camera...
Howdy

I'm struggling.
I recently took some shots of a mates 4x4 doing some mud slinging and as far as I know, I had the camera set up correctly.
It was low light so I had the iso @400 (about the max my camera can handle without producing very bad noise), the aperture was set at the widest in reference to focal length (f/3.5 - f/5.6) and I was varying the shutter based on the internal light reading meter.
(Could the aperture have caused the hazy feel?)

My shots seem correctly exposed and as the shutter rarely passed slower than 1/100th I cant see any blur, however...
When I've gone to process them in post, no mater what I do I just cant seem to get them to look right. there fine in black and white (as most are) but as soon as I add colour they just look hazy to me for some reason.

I'm currently using lightroom which I'm more than familiar with, but I haven't really tried to process anything from low light shots before.

So I ask please, Does anyone have any tips for low light processing?
All shots are in .NEF (RAW)

Any pointers would be appreciated :)

Cheers
 
Last edited:
I think it was a little darker, but not much.
lightroom says the exposer is up +1.00 over original,
I usually shoot @ ISO100-240 as my D80 loves making noise :/
this was the first time in quite a while I used ISO400.
Can the post processing cause noise? or is that from the camera in your opinion?

Cheers
 
Maybe if you post a NEF you're having problems with, I can try and process it for you and then tell you how I achieved it?
 
oO Stevie Oo said:
I think it was a little darker, but not much.
lightroom says the exposer is up +1.00 over original,
I usually shoot @ ISO100-240 as my D80 loves making noise :/
this was the first time in quite a while I used ISO400.
Can the post processing cause noise? or is that from the camera in your opinion?

Cheers
Click to expand...

You under exposed the shot by 1 stop, that makes it equivalent to shooting at ISO 800.

I think your best options is to buy faster glass, or simply go earlier in the day to get more light.

Remember, it is very important to get the exposure right in camera to get the best results.
You will also need to be careful of shutter speed, 1/100th maybe fast enough for a static scene but it may not be fast enough for the moving car. Also be careful if this is hand hold because one will naurally pan the camera a little in this situation, which will slightly blur the background but wont be enough to provide the nice m eotion blur effect.

Lastly, lighting is the criticallement in photography (in essence all you are doing is recording a sample of different photons in that scene). If the lighting is boring, grey and dull then the photos will tend to reflect this (exeptions noted, e.g. a macro photo of bright flower will often be best done on an overcast day).
 
Cheers all

Anyone know some where I can host the .NEF as ill upload and share? lol

D.P. said:
You under exposed the shot by 1 stop, that makes it equivalent to shooting at ISO 800.

I think your best options is to buy faster glass, or simply go earlier in the day to get more light.
Click to expand...

Does it really work like that? :eek:
I thought the iso was whatever you set it at, even in post lol
Good excuse to buy a new lens but why did it underexpose if I was always monitoring the light reading?
Maybe something to do with taking the reading from a white car? :/

cheers
 
When shooting into the sky with a dark foreground, i normally over expose it by 2/3. Especially there is a white sky behind your subject.

You basically under exposed it by a stop, the TTL meter is not perfect and you need to know when to shoot on the dot, when to dial it up. When you dial it up you are not pushing the iso up, more likely to increase the shutter speed to compensate.
 
DSC_9583-Edit.jpg


Just a quick play
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom