Downloadable D7000 RAW Files by Pa

[Pa]

The image shown below is the histogram of the ISO 100 image after I post-processed it.

Looks good. That's the way I would have done it.

A bit off-topic, but do you have a reading on the difference between increasing exposure in the "Quick Fix" menu in NX2 and using curves in the LCH menu as you do?

 

[Pa]

Mike, I just sent you a new version of the iso6400 file with correct exposure. I applied noise reduction of 25,5 globally and sharpening of 50,6,4 to get the following:

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

I will be interested to see what you can do with it.

 

[Mike Buckley]

Looks good. That's the way I would have done it.

A bit off-topic, but do you have a reading on the difference between increasing exposure in the "Quick Fix" menu in NX2 and using curves in the LCH menu as you do?

I don't think that's off-topic at all, as it pertains to the ideal post-processing of D7000 images.

I'm a little embarassed to realize that I have never given any thought to your question. That is because my typical style of shooting fixed scenes allows me to check the histogram in the camera and nail the exposure. So, I rarely deal with exposure compensation during post-processing.

In theory, the most effective workflow should be to adjust the exposure compensation using the Quick Fix adjustment before adjusting the levels and curves. While levels and curves affects the overall brightness, that tool is used primarily to adjust contrast and dynamic range.

I'll revisit the images tonight or this weekend to see if adjusting the exposure compensation before using the LCH Editor makes any demonstrable difference. Considering that your exposure is off by only 1/2 stop, I doubt that it will.

I like your noise reduction at least in the small image that you posted. I look forward to improving my skill in that area.

 

[Mike Buckley]

Jim,

In your treatment of the ISO 6400 image that you posted, did you change the white balance? In all of my images, I used the gray card to change it. The resulting settings are 0.97 for the red channel and 1.03 for the blue channel. Not much change from your in-camera Auto setting.

I don't know whether using an "inaccurate" white balance affects noise. I sometimes use an inaccurate one for effect, especially to add warmth to a scene. However, white balance definitely affects exposure, so that brings us back to that topic.

 

[Pa]

Jim,

In your treatment of the ISO 6400 image that you posted, did you change the white balance? In all of my images, I used the gray card to change it. The resulting settings are 0.97 for the red channel and 1.03 for the blue channel. Not much change from your in-camera Auto setting.

I don't know whether using an "inaccurate" white balance affects noise. I sometimes use an inaccurate one for effect, especially to add warmth to a scene. However, white balance definitely affects exposure, so that brings us back to that topic.

I did correct it using the gray card. I was pleasantly surprised to see how close the auto white balance was.

 

[Mike Buckley]

On my system, when I try to close the ISO 3200 image in Capture NX2, I always have to do so by exiting the software. I experience no other issues with this image, but it makes me wonder if the file became corrupt. If so, I don't know whether the corruption happened before or after I made it publicly available.

I added this note to the first post in the thread.

 

[Mike Buckley]

New results

Changing exposure compensation before changing levels and curves
Jim nicely asked (I would be willing to bet that he already knew the answer) if it wouldn't be better for me to use the Exposure Compensation adjustment before using the LCH Editor to change the levels and curves to achieve the ideal histogram. I increased the exposure by 0.75 stops. After closely evaluating the results, I can emphatically say without a doubt in my mind that doing so definitely produces better results.

The difference is that no noise appears until ISO 400. Using my previous method, it appeared at ISO 100. More important, less noise was present in all images. So, less aggressive noise reduction is also needed. That also allows me to use less aggressive sharpening, which of course is a very good thing.

I double checked Jason O'dell's workbook and didn't find anything in it advising me to use Jim's suggestion. It's probably there, but I couldn't find it.

Jim, you have single-handedly changed my workflow. Thank you!

Revised Settings
My revised settings after using the exposure compensation are as follows:

ISO 100 - NR none; USM 55, 8, 6
ISO 200 - NR none; USM 55, 8, 6
ISO 400 - NR 3, 5; USM 55, 8, 6
ISO 800 - NR 9, 5; USM 55, 8, 6
ISO 1600 - NR 12, 5; USM 55, 8, 6
ISO 3200 - NR 18, 5; USM 15, 35, 10
ISO 6400 - NR 21, 5; USM 15, 35, 12

NOTE: Those USM settings were applied after disabling in-camera sharpening.

 

[Mike Buckley]

Improved iso 6400

Jim sent me a new ISO 6400 image that was taken the next day. Unlike the first one that was underexposed by 0.75 stops, the exposure in this one was nailed. Though I understand the theory that a correct exposure produces the least amount of noise, I was shocked to see the difference. (I have little experience with noise because I have almost always shot at relatively low ISO settings in the past.) When viewing at 100% with no noise reduction and no sharpening, the properly exposed ISO 6400 image had a little less noise than the improperly exposed ISOO 3200 image and just a tad bit more noise than the improperly exposed ISO 1600 image.

The two images shown below are the improperly exposed ISO 100 image and the properly exposed ISO 6400 image. I am intentionally not letting you know which is which. Care to guess?

You'll notice that there are noticeable differences in factors not having to do with noise. That is because they were taken about 25 hours apart and the natural light was different. One was exposed using matrix metering and the other was exposed using center-weighted metering. The white balance and color balance were significantly different and I made adjustments to get them more similar. However, I was (understandably) not able to achieve a perfect match.

Though it is clear which is which when viewing at a larger size, I am very impressed when viewing these two images at this size.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

View attachment 790147

 

[Omar]

J

The two images shown below are the improperly exposed ISO 100 image and the properly exposed ISO 6400 image. I am intentionally not letting you know which is which. Care to guess?

It's obvious to me the top one is the 6400 image. Not because of noise, but because of the wood and the red ball losing detail. Even the lower part of the wall looks better at ISO 100.

I do like it though. 6400 will open a few opportunities for me in fringe shooting.

 

[Pa]

Changing exposure compensation before changing levels and curves
Jim nicely asked (I would be willing to bet that he already knew the answer)

Mike, you give me too much credit. I didn't (don't!) have any firm theoretical reason for adjusting the exposure compensation first, just an intuitive idea that that would work best.

It appears that if I completely redo the series with the correct exposure our conclusions from this exercise would be a bit different. I apologize again for not getting it right the first time, and I am willing to do it again if you wish.

 

[Mike Buckley]

It's obvious to me the top one is the 6400 image. Not because of noise, but because of the wood and the red ball losing detail. Even the lower part of the wall looks better at ISO 100.

You cheated, Omar. You weren't supposed to look at anything other than the noise. :biggrin:

Even so, you're eyes are clearly better than mine. At this small size, I don't see any difference in detail between the two.

 

[Mike Buckley]

It appears that if I completely redo the series with the correct exposure our conclusions from this exercise would be a bit different. I apologize again for not getting it right the first time, and I am willing to do it again if you wish.

It was very kind of you to provide these images, Jim. There is just as much to learn from them as if you had exposed them perfectly. Unless others provide their treatments of the images, I think we should bring the test to a close.

Your images have already been downloaded 21 times. They will surely be downloaded much more and I'm sure everyone joins me in thanking you.

 

[Mike Buckley]

Pa's NEFs have now been downloaded more than 100 times. It's clear that he has provided a valuable service to the Cafe community.

You can also download NEFs at many ISO settings of other scenes from the following blog: http://www.richardpeters.co.uk/blog/2010/11/07/nikon-d7000-full-res-high-iso-samples-vs-d300/ Not all NEFs are available for download, but Silverpenguin (a Cafe participant) is gradually making all of them available.

 

[mlenardlee]

I downloaded Pa's images and unzipped them but couldn't open them in LR3 or CS5 or even NX2. The only way I can view them is via View NX2. All my software has the latest up dates. What do you think the problem might be?

mike

 

[Omar]

I downloaded Pa's images and unzipped them but couldn't open them in LR3 or CS5 or even NX2. The only way I can view them is via View NX2. All my software has the latest up dates. What do you think the problem might be?

mike

Please verify the version number for NX2. The version that can read these files is 2.2.6. It only became available in the past 2 weeks. If you are relying on the automatic update feature of NX2 you could be waiting for a long time. You need to go to the Nikon website of the country of your choice and download it. Make sure you are good with your license number. A few of us had to type it in before we could enable the update. My reason was I had to un-install because I chose a different country version this time.

The last I heard, LR3 and CS5 are not compatible with D7000 files, unless you download a pre-release version. I don't have these, so I could be wrong.

 

[Omar]

On my system, when I try to close the ISO 3200 image in Capture NX2, I always have to do so by exiting the software. I experience no other issues with this image, but it makes me wonder if the file became corrupt. If so, I don't know whether the corruption happened before or after I made it publicly available.

I added this note to the first post in the thread.

Since I haven't seen anyone else mention it, I was able to open the ISO 3200 image, make editing changes, save and close it with no issues in NX2. The corruption must have happened at your computer.

I was a bit disappointed with how much the file size grew though. 17mb was bad enough, but the file grew 10mb on the save, due to the upgraded jpg preview. Wow. I'm used to 15Mb after processing with D90 files.

 

[Mike Buckley]

Omar,

Thanks for letting me know that the ISO 3200 image that people are downloading has apparently not been corrupted.

 

[mlenardlee]

Thanks, Omar, for info on the latest version of NX2. You were right, I've been relying on Nikon Update for the latest version. I'll now download the current version from Nikon USA.

Again, much thanks!

Mike