Wow :o What noise reduction program did you use ?
Naturally you lose a lot of tonality, and the exposure looks more like it could be around 3200/1600, but still cool
As it is, you don't add noise by adding ISO so the results wouldn't differ a lot.
Would've been nice to see a before and after and possibly the RAW frame...
Curious as to what is actually in the exposure, not just the ISO setting...
But thanks for posting
I know what you mean, Gunleik, the test has a limited value but it's interesting nonetheless.
Here's the 'before' frame in HD.
And here's the frame developed with RC3/RG3 at 800ISO.
The program used for noise reduction was Topaz Denoise.
You can download the original R3D here.
I guess I'd have put this online at RLF/800/1000/4400 kelvin.... The denoising kills off a lot of tonality in the skin, making it look a bit C300'ish...- :)
But it is interesting.
The image isn't really underexposed, if it was intended as shot... :)
Thus, there isn't a lot of real/relevant noise in there to begin with...
Matter of taste, but because of the skin, I kinda like the un denoised 12800 better....
Aren't we all different! :)
I like it better too! Just trying to see the noise characteristics and how 'cleanable' it is.
I didn't shoot that myself, but I believe it's one stop underexposed or so, maybe trying to protect the lamp.
Or just to shoot a nightscene in front of a pc... :)
That's lit. With small lamps but it is lit.
My take on the CC would go this way more or less:
Didn't intend "unlit", just that I think it's ok to be dark if you wanna be dark... Your grade is the best option IMHO :)
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|