re-occurring grainy pics PLEASE HELP!

[MichelleP]

In those test shots I shot AP. I have been going back and forth between Manual and AP trying to figure out my noise issue. Today I was shooting in manual and noticed that when my meter indicated a correct exposure it still seemed underexposed. ( I have noticed this in the past shooting in manual too not just today). Thanks for your detailed explanation. This is a great place to learn!

 

[Ysarex]

In those test shots I shot AP. I have been going back and forth between Manual and AP trying to figure out my noise issue. Today I was shooting in manual and noticed that when my meter indicated a correct exposure it still seemed underexposed. ( I have noticed this in the past shooting in manual too not just today). Thanks for your detailed explanation. This is a great place to learn!

OK -- so you have the camera in Manual and you select an ISO, shutter speed and f/stop that zeros the meter -- got that. When you then say the photo seems underexposed how are you judging that? You noted that you are saving raw files so are you judging this underexposure when you're processing the raw file and if so how? Are you judging this underexposure by looking at the camera generated JPEG and if so how?

Joe

 

[MichelleP]

I'm judging just by looking at the image in Lightroom from the raw file. I'm thinking most of my image noise is coming from the images being under exposed so I'm trying to learn to better expose for the face using spot metering. In my test shots I posted it was a bright background but I'm getting noise even when the background is midtone and the lighting is even. But maybe it was still too dark even if the camera indicated a correct exposure?

 

[Designer]

I'm judging just by looking at the image in Lightroom from the raw file. I'm thinking most of my image noise is coming from the images being under exposed so I'm trying to learn to better expose for the face using spot metering.

Don't overlook the utility of using fill flash in the daytime.

 

[Ysarex]

I'm judging just by looking at the image in Lightroom from the raw file. I'm thinking most of my image noise is coming from the images being under exposed so I'm trying to learn to better expose for the face using spot metering. In my test shots I posted it was a bright background but I'm getting noise even when the background is midtone and the lighting is even. But maybe it was still too dark even if the camera indicated a correct exposure?

Camera meters are responding to reflected light and don't know what you're pointing them at so they have to make some assumptions about what's average. If you're experimenting with the spot meter then you ideally want to place that meter spot on a middle grey tone. You daughter's face would be a little lighter than middle grey.

It is possible that you're camera's meter tends in one direction or the other but it sounds like if that's the case it's not be a large amount. Because of the "nature of the beast" reflected meters have a degree of fudge factor, but again it's not generally a large amount until the subject becomes quite unusual. Unusual subjects that cause us to pull back and consider making an adjustment for the meter are things like backlight and say a bright white painted building. In the one photo you did post you do have what amounts to a backlit condition. Otherwise if the meter is getting you within 1/3 to 1/2 stop of a good exposure you'll have enough latitude in the raw capture to compensate.

You're judging "correct exposure" with the image open in the Develop module of LR -- that's reasonable. LR is processing the raw file and applying some basic adjustments just to display the image for you. Are you looking at the photo on a calibrated display? That could easily account for a perceived 1/3 stop exposure variation.

If you're working with the raw file are you applying some noise suppression in LR? The D90 is an older tech camera and the sensor is a little noisier than current tech and you have bumped the ISO -- even the one stop to ISO 400 will count. So far all I see that you've shown us is a screen capture. If you can make a raw file available we can have a closer look and give you more solid feedback.

Joe

 

[MichelleP]

while I figure out how to post a raw file ill try again at a cropped 100%

.

 

[MichelleP]

 

[MichelleP]

Here is the RAW file
Dropbox - Sept2014 (12).NEF

2 more raw file images I had the same problems with
Dropbox - July '14 800 (111).NEF

Dropbox - july '14 (68).NEF

Oh and my monitor is calibrated

 

[Ysarex]

Here is the RAW file
Dropbox - Sept2014 (12).NEF

2 more raw file images I had the same problems with
Dropbox - July '14 800 (111).NEF

Dropbox - july '14 (68).NEF

Oh and my monitor is calibrated

And here's the stats on your photo:

That's a histogram of your raw sensor exposure. It's a good exposure -- in fact it's an excellent exposure from the camera's perspective. Diffuse highlight placement is right where it belongs. The magenta oval indicates clipped highlights but if you look at the photo that's the little patch of white building in direct sun on the left behind the car in the driveway. That patch of bight white is anomalous and your camera's meter system handled it correctly by ignoring it.

Overall noise level is normal for a D90, I'd say your camera is working very well. The yellow bar in the histogram is the location in the exposure that corresponds to the yellow oval marked on the young girl's left cheek. There's some noise apparent there but it's expected given the exposure. I lifted the exposure for her face and applied some noise reduction filtering in LR to smooth it over but you're at the physical limit of the sensor.

Bottom line: From the camera's perspective it's a very good exposure of the sunlit shrubbery that fills 40 to 50% of the scene. So as other folks here previously noted you don't have a problem with the camera or an exposure problem -- this is a lighting problem. Changing your metering mode to spot meter the girl's face would increase the exposure appropriately for her but it would also increase the exposure for the background which would start clipping all the background highlights.

Given a forced choice between badly wrong and less wrong the increased exposure for the girl's face would be less wrong. Rather than accept some version of wrong; fix the lighting.

Joe

 

[KmH]

+1. Use flash as fill or your main light for shooting portrait photos in daylight.
You have way more control of both the ambient light and light from the flash.

Regardless, you have to understand the effects of light direction and light quality if you want to make high quality photos of people.

 

[gsgary]

Use a slower film in your D90 that should work or take the film out so you get noise

 

[MichelleP]

Yes, thank you for sarcastically pointing out that I don't know the difference between grain and noise. Now I do.

 

[gsgary]

Yes, thank you for sarcastically pointing out that I don't know the difference between grain and noise. Now I do.

Us film users get a bit upset when digital shooter call it grain

 

[The_Traveler]

Denoising before editing helps a great deal