Posts Tagged ‘noise’

High ISO Performance of DSLRs From the 2001 Super Bowl Versus Now

 

Want to see how far DSLRs have come in the past decade? Lee Morris of Fstoppers published these two photos taken at Super Bowl halftime shows. The crop on the left was captured in 2001, possibly with the Nikon D1H at 2.7 megapixels and ISO 800 (state of the art specs at the time). The slice on the right was from this past weekend, and was shot with a Nikon D3s at 12MP and ISO 12,800.


Image credits: Photographs by Lonny Krasnow/AP and FilmMagic

Freeze Your Camera for Less Noise

 

Last Friday an anonymous poster on the photography board of 4chan sparked a discussion that rippled into the blogosphere after freezing their camera to see whether ISO performance improves at lower temperatures.

They stuck their Sony A350 into the freezer for 15 minutes, and posted the following before and after comparison of noise at ISO 3200:

Regardless of whether or not these results were fabricated, it has long been (though perhaps not widely) known among photographers that digital cameras have better ISO performance (i.e. less noise) at lower temperatures, which is why sensors are often cooled for astro-photography. Other photographers also report improved ISO performance when shooting in very cold environments.

Zodiac Light did an interesting experiment in which a Canon 350D was cooled, and the amount of noise measured. They found that cooling the sensor resulted in a 40% drop in the amount of noise.

Obviously you shouldn’t freeze your nice camera to test this out yourself, but it’s an interesting fact to know, and could be useful if you’re interested in long exposure photography.

(via The Phoblographer)


Thanks to Nathan Yan for briefing us on thermal noise.


Image credit: Don’t drop your camera! by Island-Life and used with permission.

Why Higher ISO Leads to Larger File Sizes

 

Something you may have noticed when adjusting your camera’s ISO setting is that as you increase ISO, the number of remaining shots you have decreases. This is because the size of each photograph increases with ISO, and thus less of them can be stored in the available space of your memory card.

So why does the file size increase as you increase ISO? The answer has to do with image noise and file compression. First we’ll discuss the noise element.

Image Noise

You probably know already that a higher ISO number leads to more noise in the resulting image. This is because digital cameras achieve the same behavior of “more sensitive film” by amplifying the image signal the camera receives when it captures a photograph. This amplification also amplifies the noise that exists in every image regardless of ISO, and therefore higher ISOs have highly amplified noise.

To demonstrate, I captured the following photograph at both ISO 100 and ISO 3200:

Here’s a side by side comparison of crops from the two images:

The noise should be pretty obvious. The RAW file of the ISO100 version is 10.2MB in size, while the ISO3200 version is 14.7MB. In this case, the higher ISO leads to a 44% larger file.

An interesting property of digital cameras is that there is more noise in darker regions of photographs than brighter regions. The opposite is true for film. This means that the file size difference discussed here will be far less when shooting with more light, such as when you’re photographing outdoors.

As an example, here is another scene that I photographed first at ISO100, and then at ISO3200:

Though there is still a significant amount of noise in the image, the ISO100 photo has a 15.8MB file size, while the ISO3200 photo is 16.7MB. This means that for this outdoors shot, the higher ISO only caused a 5.7% increase in file size. There’s other factors that will cause this percentage to fluctuate, such as the complexity of the scene, but in general the percentage should be less when photographing with more light.

File Compression

Now that we’ve shown the increased image noise that comes with higher ISO numbers, we’ll discuss why this causes the file size to increase.

Regardless of whether you’re shooting RAW or JPEG, it’s likely your photographs are stored in a compressed format. While some cameras allow you to choose whether and how files are compressed, RAW images (i.e. Canon’s CR2 format) are usually compressed using a lossless algorithm, meaning the exact original data can be reconstructed from the compressed data. On the other hand, JPEG is lossy, so the more you work with JPEG files, the less data you’ll have as the compression throws out more and more data.

Here is a sequence of images from Wikipedia showing lossy compression (with PNGs):

The image on the right is the most compressed, and therefore has the least information. There is no way to recover the original detail from the compressed image to reconstruct the original (on the left), since the information was thrown out in order to save space when compressing the file.

The reason noise increases file sizes is because image compression relies on repetition, or patterns. In images with less noise, there are more areas of consistent patterns (i.e. the clear blue sky) that can be compressed. On the other hand, when noise is introduced, these adjacent areas that could have been grouped together and compressed must be split and stored separately, since the noise introduces randomness that cannot be compressed.

Here are four different 100×100 JPEG squares, saved with the same image quality:

On the left is a square with solid blue, which affords maximum compression and therefore the smallest file size. The second square has two shades of blue, alternating by row, while the third square alternates by column. Due to the way the JPEG format compresses images, the second square can be compressed more efficiently than the third, even though both contain exactly the same number of pixels of each shade. Finally, the last square has artificial noise added in using Photoshop. This noise introduces randomness, which results in the least compression and the largest file size.

Now, for a super simplified example of compression, consider the following “photo” with 3 “pixels”:

Since all three pixels are the same, instead of storing the data for all three, one possible way I could “compress” the photo would be to store the color information once and just remember that the entire range of pixels is that color. (i.e. Pixel 1-3 = Blue)

Now, lets say some “noise” is introduced, which changes the image to the following:

Now I can’t specify a single range and a single color, since the sequence has been interrupted. The best I could do might be to say (Pixel 1 & 3 = Blue, Pixel 2 = Yellow), which obviously takes more information to represent.

This isn’t exactly how image compression works, but hopefully you get the point that randomness interferes with compression.

Conclusion

In this post we showed that increasing ISO causes increased noise, which in turn causes larger file sizes due to inefficient file compression. Many of you more advanced photographers might have known some (or all) of this already, but hopefully it was illuminating for some of you.

Hi-Yah! Killing Noise With Noise Ninja

 

Update: This giveaway is now over. The winners were randomly selected and announced here. Thanks to everyone who participated!


One of the tools I occasionally bust out during post-processing is Noise Ninja, a noise-reduction program/plugin used by seven of the ten largest newspapers in the United States.

Take this photograph I took yesterday as an example:

before

Though I was shooting outdoors with plenty of light, I had accidentally left my ISO set at 1600. This caused the photograph to end up looking dirty and full of noise. In addition, I underexposed the photo, giving it even more noise after correcting the exposure during post-processing.

You can hover over the above image to see the image after using Noise Ninja on it.

Don’t see much of a difference? Maybe a crop of a smaller area of the frame will help you see what Noise Ninja does (hover over this before image to see the after image):

beforec

Neat, huh? The amount of noise in the photo was significantly reduced, even before tweaking and selectively editing the image. For some more before-and-after examples, visit the gallery on the PictureCode website.

I’m giving away three (3) Noise Ninja Pro Bundle licenses, each worth $79.95. These bundles include the Photoshop plugin, the Aperture plugin, and the standalone program. All you need to do to enter this giveaway is answer the following question:

If you could turn into any animal, which animal would you choose?

There’s two ways you can tell us your answer, and feel free to use both ways:

  1. Leave a comment on this post (at PetaPixel.com)
  2. Tweet your answer, and include this link somewhere in the tweet:

    http://bit.ly/ptpxnn

    The tweet doesn’t even need to be @petapixel. As long as the link is somewhere in the tweet, our friendly little giveaway bot will find it.

This giveaway will end next Tuesday morning, on August 25th, 2009. We’ll be picking the winner randomly using random.org. As usual, in addition to the winner we’ll post some of the more creative or interesting responses we receive.

Good luck!


PictureCode is not (currently) a sponsor of PetaPixel. They were simply nice enough to provide us with these licenses for us to give away to you, our awesome readers.


Update: Just learned that I had accidentally posted the deadline as September 1st, or a week later than I intended. Fixed it to read August 25th. Thanks for catching this @scottnopants!