frozentimes.net

original_crop.jpg

I was looking for a good noise reduction tool. When I looked on the internet it was not clear to me what would be the best program, so I did some testing.

My main goal is to reduce most of the noise without the use of all the fancy settings. Personally I do not hate some noise in my pictures. Probably because I own a Canon 5D which doesn’t generate much noise at all. But the main reason why I’m looking for noise reduction software has to do with HDR. When I generate a HDR image I always get more noise in my images then I wished for. So I am in need of some good noise reduction tool

Don’t expect too much of this mini test. Basically what I did was the following, I opened the original photo with the appropriate program or plug-in (within Adobe Photoshop CS4). If the program or plug-in had an automatic setting I used that. If not I only used the most basic adjustments/settings to get a decent result. Maybe I am just lazy, but hey I don’t want to spend my precious time with reducing noise.

So the image on the top left is a crop of the original HDR file. (the un-cropped image can be found in the following article "HDR Curacao – misty water"). The other images are the results of one of the following tools:

• Noise Ninja 2.2.1 (Stand Alone)
• Noise Ware 2.6 (Stand Alone)
• Noise Ware 4.2 (Photoshop plug-in)
• Photoshop CS4 (Stand Alone)
• Lightroom 3 (Stand Alone)
• NikSoft Dfine 2 (Photoshop plug-in)
• Neat Image Pro 6.0 (Stand Alone)
• Topaz Denoise 4(Photoshop plug-in)

The most important thing for me is that I don’t loose any important details in the photo, so that is one of the things I based my conclusion on. The other important one is of course the reduction of noise. So I used the images below to pick the best tool (for my use)

Conclusion
The build in functionality in Photoshop and Lightroom affect the details too much, so does Dfine from NikSoft and Topaz Denoise. Noise Ninja and Noiseware (the standalone versions) do a good job. For me the Plug-in version of Noiseware disturbs the details a wee bit too much. (which is strange in my opinion because you would think it would give the same result as the standalone). Neat Image was a disappointment to me. I read some good reviews on the net but in my test-case it doesn’t reduce much noise but does affect the details.

So I need to choose between Noise Ninja and Noiseware. Based on the images below I would say Noiseware 2.6 (standalone). Maybe I need to do some more testing with different photos.

Neat Image Pro 6.0.jpg

NikSoft Dfine 2.0 CS4.jpg

Noiseware 2.6 Standalone.jpg

Noiseware 4.2 CS4.jpg

Photoshop CS4.jpg

Topaz Denoise CS4_crop.jpg

lightroom 3.jpg

noise ninja.jpg

Waterdrops mei 2010-022.jpg

Another experiment that I have been working on, water drops. This is still a huge challenge for me. I keep doing something wrong.

The results I get are alright but that is where it ends. I have been reading many tutorials and this has improved the results but I am still not satisfied. There is always something (little) that prevents me of getting the result that I want.

For example, when you look at the pictures in this gallery you will see little white spots in the water. These are little air bubbles that were sticking to the bottom of my glass bowl. And I couldn’t find a way to get rid of them. I do realize, after reading a few more tuts, that I need to use the duration of the flash as exposure time and not the actual exposure time from the camera. So this will be something to play with. I also know now that you don’t need to light the actual water drop but that you need to use the reflection of the light. All little things that you need to be aware of…

Will be continued….

Flowers april 2010-003-bewerkt.jpg

Flowers and Close-up. A nice and relaxing subject…. It is just a way to work and test my close-up objectives and try to improve my Macro skills a wee bit. During spring and summertime we have some nice flowers in the garden which are good subjects to play with. And over and over again i keep getting surprised by the beautiful images you get when you crawl into the heart of flowers.

When I bought my first macro lens (Canon 100mm f/2.8) I started with photographing flowers, and now with the Canon MP-E 65mm in my possession it is even more intriguing to see the wonders of mother nature. In this article just a few examples. Most of the time I am looking for the tiny flowers opposite to the larges species. Just because it is more of a challenge for me to work with these.

Flowers april 2010-004-bewerkt.jpg

Flowers april 2010-014.jpg

Flowers april 2010-017.jpg

What I do know for sure is that there will follow more flower photographs in the future, due to the fact it is so much fun to do. Just click on the photo’s to see the larger versions.

Flower Drops Sept 2009-012.jpg

More experiments with drops of water on flower petals. Or as I like to call them ‘Flowerdrops’.

Don’t ask me why but I love to play with this concept. For starters it is fun to do, and I can learn a lot while trying to beat the problems that I will encounter.

It gives me the opportunity too play with several aspects of photography, think about; Close-up shooting, light setup , composition, and color. So in a very tiny space I can work with all these different factors. Just see it as my mini studio on the dinner table in the kitchen. The only thing that you need to remember is to keep your flowers fresh…

Flower Drops Sept 2009-016.jpg

• Close-up shooting: Static objects, so no moving bugs and other influences from mother nature
• Light setup: You can use small flashed and little pieces of paper, so no big studio lights and soft boxes.
• Composition: It is very important to set the right position, (otherwise the water drop will not show the image of the flowers in the background) So I need to think about composition which is a nice challenge. But also possible because of the small setting
• Color: Most flowers are very colorful, which gives me the opportunity to play with these colors, and the small setting gives me the freedom to easily change backgrounds.

If you keep the above in mind you will be able to create nice pictures. For me it is looking for that little bit extra. And I do realize that I still have many roads in front of me.

Flower Drops Sept 2009-003-bewerkt.jpg

Flower Drops Sept 2009-064.jpg

Flower Drops Sept 2009-033.jpg

Curacao-2010-1631.jpg

While visiting Curacao during our holiday, I had the perfect opportunity to experiment with long exposures and try to get the misty water effect. An effect of which I am a huge fan. I also wanted to combine this effect with another effect, HDR. So I needed long exposures and at least three of them for each photo.

Before we left I have been thinking about buying a variable ND filter, but after reading many reviews on the internet, and learning that the Fader ND from Light Craft Workshop wouldn’t work with most of my Canon lenses and the Singh-Ray was way above my budget, I decided that I should be able to do without.

Curacao 2010-1604_5_6.jpg

I have to say that I wished I had more cash to buy the Singh-Ray filter, because I did miss it. An on the other hand, the people a Light Craft were telling me that they were working on a new version of their filter, but I didn’t know if that would fix my problems (showing a black cross on wide angle Canon lenses) and it would not ship before our departure date so that was no option.

So I had my tripod set on the beach and tried to block some light with my Cokin ND filters. Unfortunately they have a purple color cast so I didn’t try to combine two of these (which will intensify the color cast). You can adjust the white balance to minimize the color cast but you can only do so much. So I ended up with only one Cokin ND8 filter and at the end I achieved 30 seconds for the +2 stop shot on the smallest aperture.

Curacao 2010-1639_40_41.jpg

But only 2,5 seconds for the -2 stop shots. And 2,5 seconds is just too short for the nice misty (long exposure) effect.

So all I could do was hope that combining the the 30 sec. exposure with the 2,5 sec. and the 15 sec. exposure during the HDR process would solve my problem. And at the end it dis, but I am still convinced that I would achieve better results if I can extend the exposure times. So maybe I need to save more money, or set my hopes on the new Mark II filter form the guys at Light Craft. So more reviews to read.

Curacao 2010-1058_59_60-2.jpg

We went on a holiday to Curacao and there I found an old quarantine house on the edge of a cliff it was an abandoned building with rotten floors, but the light was beautiful, so a nice situation for some HDR shots. I was the only person at the location, probably due to the extreme temperature during the day.

Curacao 2010-1015_6_7-bewerkt.jpg

I love the way how the color of the light is effected when the HDR technique is used, especially the shot on the left is a good example of what i am talking about. All shots are three shots (-2, 0, +2 stops) combined in Photomatix. I know it is not standard to have such huge color shift but when you play a bit in Photomatix it is an option at least. In in some situation I just love the effect.

I used a tripod for all the indoor shots. Most shots taken without tripod failed miserably, just because of the simple fact that it is almost impossible to combine a good HDR is you don’t use a steady base.

Curacao 2010-1024_5_6.jpg

Also outside where is enough light to achieve a faster shutter speed it is recommended to use your tripod. Personally I always mess it up and keep thinking that I will survive without. Dumb thought!. I hope I will learn eventually (LOL).

I always try to get the best result from Photomatix without the need to do more adjustments in Photoshop or Lightroom. Some of the photos in this series needed small corrections because I used a width angle lens and I don’t like the curved lines. But that was basically it. Want to see more? Just click on one of the photos and you will be taken to the gallery where you will find more from this serries.

Curacao 2010-1036_7_8.jpg

Curacao-2010-1002.jpg

IMG_2729.jpg

I was lucky today. I stood on the balcony and saw a Small White butterfly. It was relaxing in the sun on the glass border of the balcony. I walked upstarts to get my camera with the MP-E 65mm Macro lens and Macro flash. It gave me about 15 minutes to work with it.

Unfortunately it was very hard to use the flash on the glass background, and too dark to work with the MP-E 65mm without flash. So I had to improvise. I disconnected the flash from the lens and used it handheld, this gave me the opportunity to move the flash to the back and control the light that way.

IMG_2771.jpg

Personally I am very pleased with the result. Just click on the image to go to the gallery to see more.

Later that day, still my gear on the kitchen table, I noticed a few bugs in the garden. All I want to say is I just love to phoograph bugs in their natrual habitat, but that it is hell to do so especially with the Canon MP-E 65mm. For me it is like a bug-hunt and it give me extra credits if I succeed without any animal unfriendly tricks.

IMG_2790.jpg

After reading a very good tutorial (I won’t share the link here) about how to control bugs for macro shots I have to say that I agree in the comments that were placed on this tutorial. You just do not control bugs, if you don’t have to. And if you have enough experience and skill there is no need for this.

The guy wrote about freezing insects, using vinegar, using sticky tape and more. I think that the pictures in this article prove that there is no need for bug control. And that it is more then possible to shoot bugs in their natural environment.

[Canon 5d, MP-E 65mm, Sigma Macro flash]

IMG_9803.jpg

While I was setting up the studio for the shoot with Nickita and Mick I made some test shots. I used myself as subject to get the light the right way. When I transferred the images o my PC I noticed that some of them were actually quit nice. So I started to play with them in Adobe Lightroom and Adobe Photoshop. To see more just click on the images.

What did I do? First of all I got my exposure on the correct setting in Lightroom, then I opened it in Photoshop. Played with contrast and brightness.

IMG_9776_tonemapped.jpg

When I was satisfied I copied the main layer and set the layer mode of the copied layer to “Soft Light’. What this does in a B&W photo is make you edges more vivid, and this will give you the idea that you have sharpened your photo. That’s all I did to all but one.

The one on the left was actually a single HDR (HDR made from one single shot) that was tonemapped and then set to B&W. From there I did the same actions as I did on the other photo’s

HDR_Boat_2010-3.jpg

On one of my trips through the country side I saw two rowing boats filled with water laying the waterside. And I thought these were a good subject for HDR. Brought my tripod and 16-40mm lens and made some shots. Back home, after trying a few settings in Photomatix I did not like the results at all. Then I remembered an article I read on the internet which showed an example of black and white HDR photography. (link). The article shows an nice example that appealed a lot to me. So I decided to try it myself (on my own way – not following the tutorial) and I must say that I am very pleased with the result.

HDR_Barn_2010-4.jpg

For many months I have been driving by this barn, even plotted it on my GPS. But never took the time to stop and take some pictures, until now.

I can’t explain why but I just like the whole scenery and always had the feeling that I needed to photograph this, in HDR. So finally I did.

I had a lot of dust on my sensor and because this is not normally the case, I experienced something new. The HDR process emphasizes the dust spots in a way that it is almost impossible to remove them. So to make sure that I could still use the images I decided to give them a old-fashion look and feel and applied a sepia filter to it. Personally I like the result and it fits the idea I had in my mind.