5D3 candle light High ISO (102400)

[skitron]

Here's the low light cat pic processed with Capture One Pro v7. Basically nothing but NR, local contrast, vignette and RGB curve. I used Stephen Melvin's nice render as an asthetic template and just messed with it (i.e. the original RAW) in CO to see if it could do the same thing...

Skitron, CaptureOne also does well... Do I see a thin veil of green snow in dark parts not seen in the LR versions some of us posted? look at the middle of the frame on and above the dark torso.

Obviously user setting could result in different rendering...but it may also be the nuances of different programs.

Yes, I see a bit of green in the CO and a bit stronger blue in the LR. I'm sure one could mess with them to make them identical, but my exercise was first to see if CO would do what Stephen did in LR, and the answer for me is yes. Then the exercise for me turned to learning to embrace the chiaroscuro, and I learned alot about that from your nice shot and Stephen's nice render. So thanks to both of you for the inadvertent lesson for me!

[edit] And I'm pleased as can be to know that I can shoot at this ridiculous ISO setting and there are at least two editors, probably more, that can deal with it to at least some useful degree. Pretty amazing tech.

[Stephen Melvin]

Yes, I see a bit of green in the CO and a bit stronger blue in the LR. I'm sure one could mess with them to make them identical, but my exercise was first to see if CO would do what Stephen did in LR, and the answer for me is yes. Then the exercise for me turned to learning to embrace the chiaroscuro, and I learned alot about that from your nice shot and Stephen's nice render. So thanks to both of you for the inadvertent lesson for me!

You're welcome. The rendering of the colors is affected by so many variables, even within a single program. In LR, I selected the "Camera Standard" profile, which is designed to mimic Canon's standard color rendering. I also used the "adjustment brush" to get rid of some of the blue speckles in certain areas of the image. It didn't take long.

[edit] And I'm pleased as can be to know that I can shoot at this ridiculous ISO setting and there are at least two editors, probably more, that can deal with it to at least some useful degree. Pretty amazing tech.

It truly is a dream come true for me. I now find myself looking for more ridiculous light to shoot in, and it's very hard to find a situation that I can't make something out of.

Here's a larger render of my adjustments:
http://galleries.stevemelvin.com/primary.jpg

[Don Haines]

So what... I have a four year old Olympus E-520 that can take pictures that grainy at only ISO1600

Seriously though.... 6 stops higher and less noise.... WOW! This is a huge difference.... ISO800 was unusable on the E-520, we have come a long way.

[RS2021]

So what... I have a four year old Olympus E-520 that can take pictures that grainy at only ISO1600

 

[CarlTN]

If I had been the original poster, I think a bunch of you would have piled on me and told me "that's not acceptable for web viewing, it's not worthy" !!!

Wouldn't it have been better to just leave the camera at the highest native ISO and underexposed it?  I got told that a lot too...yet I didn't see where any of you said that.  I admit I didn't read every post.

[RS2021]

If I had been the original poster, I think a bunch of you would have piled on me and told me "that's not acceptable for web viewing, it's not worthy" !!!

Wouldn't it have been better to just leave the camera at the highest native ISO and underexposed it?  I got told that a lot too...yet I didn't see where any of you said that.  I admit I didn't read every post.

I clearly stated in the original post that it was an experimental shot that was specifically designed to play with highest extended ISO capture. I did my best to control the light, shared with everyone the basic setup and export parameters, and also uploaded the CR2 raw files so the community can chime in. When programs and tweaks were suggested, it was pursued with an open mind. Many of us repeatedly acknowledged it was experimental and a learning tool. And, speaking for myself, I really learned from others in this process.

Isn't that one of the useful purposes of a community such as ours?

[Don Haines]

If I had been the original poster, I think a bunch of you would have piled on me and told me "that's not acceptable for web viewing, it's not worthy" !!!

If you were the original poster, we would have accused you of stealing Ray's cat

[CarlTN]

If I had been the original poster, I think a bunch of you would have piled on me and told me "that's not acceptable for web viewing, it's not worthy" !!!

Wouldn't it have been better to just leave the camera at the highest native ISO and underexposed it?  I got told that a lot too...yet I didn't see where any of you said that.  I admit I didn't read every post.

I clearly stated in the original post that it was an experimental shot that was specifically designed to play with highest extended ISO capture. I did my best to control the light, shared with everyone the basic setup and export parameters, and also uploaded the CR2 raw files so the community can chime in. When programs and tweaks were suggested, it was pursued with an open mind. Many of us repeatedly acknowledged it was experimental and a learning tool. And, speaking for myself, I really learned from others in this process.

Isn't that one of the useful purposes of a community such as ours?

No need to get defensive, my question wasn't directed at you, but rather the people who like to critique.  I never thought it was anything other than an experiment, and I read that part...just saying sometimes it seems like criticism isn't always as productive as it could be, or as egalitarian.  I don't disagree with most everything suggested, and I am trying to learn also...which is why I asked my second question.  Sorry if I shouldn't have posted what I did.

If I had been the original poster, I think a bunch of you would have piled on me and told me "that's not acceptable for web viewing, it's not worthy" !!!

If you were the original poster, we would have accused you of stealing Ray's cat

Haha, good point!  No need, I have my own cat...and no, this is the opposite of the best picture I've shot of him...I may put some better ones in the thread about cat pictures.

[RS2021]

If I had been the original poster, I think a bunch of you would have piled on me and told me "that's not acceptable for web viewing, it's not worthy" !!!

If you were the original poster, we would have accused you of stealing Ray's cat

Lol...She is a Maine Coon. Like all New Englanders she will not be taken so easily. Oh fine, may be with a bit of deli turkey 

[CarlTN]

Mine is also a Mainecoon...or else a Siberian...I don't know...he seems to have the "M" on his forehead.