Looking for Noise Reduction Suggestion/Settings

[jagabo]

I'm pretty sure your camera is not shooting with 1/40 second shutter in that outside video. Look at the cars moving in the background -- there is no motion blur at all. That indicates a high shutter speed which would explain your noise problem.

[jaysodyssey]

Lmotlow, that LAST reply was VERY helpful, thanks. I wasnt trying to snap at you before, i just want to solve this. I am an engineer in IT by trade, so when something is WRONG I want to locate the issue and fix it.

Also I agree about there being some CHROMA and NOISE but I keep going back to the videos on youtube, shot with IDENTICAL body, and IDENTICAL Lens, yet well look at them

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZc-7CoCIdg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xluKl1e-26Y

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5znGcbvBusg

strange!

I WILL find the issue, eventually!

[smrpix]

@jaysodyessey, you are not looking at those YouTube videos critically enough. Two of the three are obviously and heavily processed, the third somewhat more subtly, and they all exhibit the same inherent contrast deficiencies your alley footage.

[LMotlow]

GoPro. Popular, with video that's really tough to work with. Always look like overshapening. There are several threads about trying to fix GoPro video for popular delivery formats. No one has an easy time of it, and Avisynth is almost a requirement.

It's too bad you can't get another camera. I borrowed a CANON (not cheap, either) from friends. I'm sure they'll never let me use it again, I kept it for over a month but they figured they owed me for fixing a bad wedding video for decent DVD. That camera had very little noise, even for night shots. I think it was $1200 (don't quote me). Took it on a trip to the UK and shot video at 1440x1080. 4:3, so I could downsize for smaller formats, and it was said that this was the camera's best performance. I didn't like the videos: my own fault, I was too jerky and idiotic with it. So I made a 1280x720 slide show (with pillars each side) and 4:3 DVD slides. Reason: this was a few years years ago and most friends still had 4:3 CRTs.

Almost all exposures were manual, based on my trusty Pentax spot meter. They did need some cleanup, especially the night shots, but not much. Thank goodness for the old MvDegrain, TGMC, and to curve filters to tame some highlights. But it wasn't all that difficult. At the risk of oversimplifying, here are 5 shots reduced for posting to 340 height. I attached bigger 960x720 images from the slide show, without the side pillars. Maybe show you the difference between another camera and some very mild processing. If I recall, I used IS0 800 for all of them.

A: Early evening, about 7:30 pm, strong contrast. I took exposure readings off the darks, midtones, and bright reflections on the water. I decided that the corridor on the lower right wasn't important, and I let the sky go where it wanted to. The camera's meter turned all the shadows black, so I didn't use that reading.


B: Evening again, maybe 8pm or so. No way I was going to get lots of detail out of some areas, but I opened the lens a bit to get at least some outlines. This needed MDegrain2, some derainbow filters for light chroma noise, a low-power contrast mask to help the darks just a bit more, then some light NeatVideo and sharpening. With shots like this you just have to decide what's important and what isn't. Or find a better time of day.


V: Night shot, mostly spill light from tungsten lighting. The camera's meter tried to make this look like daylight (terrible!). I used a mild amber filter to kill some of the excess blue from unlighted areas.


D: Indoor lighting, and really bright stuff coming thru the big windows. Camera meter saw the bright windows and tried to darken the interior. I opened the lens a bit according to my spot meter and exposed for the lower part of the pic. Unless you bring your own lighting, no way you'll get perfect results from this kind of mixed lighting. Processing: I'd used that amber filter again, but there was still too much cyan from the windows, corrected with a gradation filter in After Effects. Also had to tame the bright windows a bit. Some camera motion on this frame, so it's a bit blurry.


E: Subdued cloudy lighting. The camera wanted everything unnaturally bright, like it insisted that this should be bright sunlight when no sun was out. I used a Skylight 1A filter on the lens to tame some blue. No denoising here. Later I cropped this for a wider angle pic and we used it as desktop wallpaper for a couple of years.


I was disappointed that the videos had some visible shimmer and line twitter. Not the best encoder, I guess, but my shaky hands didn't help. Like I said, idiot with a shoulder brace and no tripod.

I'd say learn to set your own exposures, use filters when you have to (I also had a neutral density and polarizing filter that sometimes helped with strong highlights). Even with a good camera, shots like this need processing of one kind or another. At first I wanted a copy of that camera even if I had to max out a credit card, but in the end I'm glad I didn't go into digital movie cams in the long run. Let the other guy hassle with it. Maybe I could find a used pro job somewhere, but that still won't be cheap. As it is, it took me a month to make the two versions of the slide show. I used only about 10 to 15% of all that I shot.

[EDIT} I forgot: jagabo made a good point about shutter speeds. I also have to agree with smrpix; those videos ain't so great, and it looks like some folks don't understand video levels too well. Some of the motion looked kinda spastic, too. The best thing about learning from UTube is spotting the kinds of mistakes to avoid.

Hey, good luck. Maybe the pics and how I shot and processed the original videos will give you some ideas. jagabo had a good script earlier, too.

[jaysodyssey]

Two of the three are obviously and heavily processed, the third somewhat more subtly, and they all exhibit the same inherent contrast deficiencies your alley footage.

which takes me back to the original thread topic, if I cannot get rid of these artifacts in the original footage, what is a easy to use NR program to make my videos look like the ones in the links!

BTW it must be my eyes but I did not see the artifacts in any of those videos that I am clearly seeing in my footage

[jaysodyssey]

I'm pretty sure your camera is not shooting with 1/40 second shutter in that outside video.

I read to you the settings off the camera as I did them, if the camera is not shooting at the settings that I am using, then there is an override problem,

[jaysodyssey]

I'm pretty sure your camera is not shooting with 1/40 second shutter in that outside video.

I THINK THIS STATEMENT IS THE CLOSEST TO THE TRUTH SO FAR

the QUESTION is whats next to prove it!

[jaysodyssey]

I think I found it!

It would have been easy to miss, this explains why the Live view never changed when I reset the ISO and aperture

I am going to go out and do a couple tests, Ill be back in a bit with the footage!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NskatE8-auc

[jaysodyssey]

I am very HAPPY to report that the mystery has been solved, and while it opens up a new can of worms, I am super excited now. I think now we can finally start to explore how to correct noise if necessary.

So I took the camera out to a busy street, interesting side comment is that drivers around here SUCK, if that is not clear in the video. for this test I used a ND 8 filter for all of the clips but the final one.

lens was 18-55 f3.5-5.6 Nikkor VR G

Shutter, ISO, Aperture, as well as EV Comp are showing changes in this mode. I noticed that the "snow" as I have come to call it, seems to come out once I pass ISO 400, so anything shot on ISO 800-3200 will need NR is my guess. The colors and contrast of the sky and the cars seems to balance nicely, (IMHO) , and the 1\4000 was very hard to get even in broad daylight, it takes some powerful light to get that shutter speed, hopefully I never have to shoot at that! it is my best guess that prior to this the clips were all being shot at ISO 1600 or possibly 3200 or above, no way of knowing that I guess. Also for some reason my range on the shutter was between 1\4000 - 1\30 and I could not go any slower!

I also noticed when i removed the ND8 the colors in the trees on the far side of the road came back stronger then with it on.

To get the settings in this test clip I went into movie mode and chose the hidden option at the very bottom, MANUAL movie mode. My guess is without this activated no matter what you set on the camera, the camera overrides it! Nice going NIKON, you couldnt even tell us that was happening!

Ill let everyone look at this test clip, and then maybe we can start to experiment with some NR if its even necessary!

As A final note I should say that for a low priced DSLR I found the movie quality to be very clean (well at ISO 200 anyway lol)

[jagabo]

Problem solved. I don't see any need for noise reduction at ISO 200.

[jaysodyssey]

Problem solved. I don't see any need for noise reduction at ISO 200.

I concur, but what happens when I cannot keep it at ISO 200?

Or is there a trick I know not to keep it at 200 always?

ISO 200 is really clean! 400 is doable as well,

[newpball]

I concur, but what happens when I cannot keep it at ISO 200?

Or is there a trick I know not to keep it at 200 always?

Well for starters for video there is no need to shoot at 1/4000.

[jaysodyssey]

Well for starters for video there is no need to shoot at 1/4000.

ok i get it ha ha on the new guy lol,



someone once told me a pro photographer makes an OK videographer, whatever that means lol

I know I have a lot to learn and no one will probably ever watch my Docu, but I have a great eye, and years of training in all sorts of photography styles, including run and gun work with the associated press (Police & Fire call beat), Swimsuit modeling, landscapes, Astro-photography, and U name it lol

but to be fair I doubt even with the first clips I showed you (with the horrendous color) were even at 1\4000, who knows what the shutter was, or the ISO for that matter

[newpball]

someone once told me a pro photographer makes an OK videographer, whatever that means lol

Actually I prefer to talk with people with a photography background, they have a good basis to get into video.
There are already too many videographers who only know where to find the auto button.

I know I have a lot to learn and no one will probably ever watch my Docu, but I have a great eye, and years of training in all sorts of photography styles, including run and gun work with the associated press (Police & Fire call beat), Swimsuit modeling, landscapes, Astro-photography, and U name it lol

That's good and the more you do video the more you realize that a lot of that knowledge albeit in a somewhat different form can be applied to video as well.

[jaysodyssey]

I know things like Manual mode and shutter and ISO but it all seems to get turned on its head with video

With photography 1\4000 is a great setting to capture action

[newpball]

I know things like Manual mode and shutter and ISO but it all seems to get turned on its head with video

Actually they do not!

I'd say shutter is relatively speaking the most constant. As a guideline keep the double the framerate rules, thus if you shoot at 24p use 1/50 if you shoot at 60p use 1/125. Now that is not a hard rule, you can always go faster. Slower may be a bit more tricky.

Now with the shutter speed constrained you only have aperture and ISO to play with. In daylight that means that you really want to have some ND filters around because most of the time you would not want to shoot narrower than f/8 or perhaps f/11. Inside you will be poor on light and inside you really want to add additional lighting unless you can use windows or natural light reflection (but be worried about continuity). Boosting the ISO is a path to disaster, depending on your camera if you go over 800 it is pretty much game over unless you want to get lots of noise. A faster lens will help but that is $$$.

Experiment and have fun!

[jaysodyssey]

Your right even at ISO 800 there is also some noise, I carry a pack of ND by Ultura Photo - They are ND2 - ND4 - ND8 respectively , as for lowering the shutter it gets way to dark, and since I cannot get over 1\30 for some reason my guess is my shutter play is going to be between 1\30 - 1\100 or so

I have a very fast lens, its a 50mm f 1.8 , so I am sure for some shots that can be used when we do not need to show a wide frame , as for audio I have the rode, and a bunch of Lapels as well, I think my safe ISO on that camera is going to be 200-800, if I go over that ill deal with what I saw in the beginning, as you said aperture is also flex but will have an effect on the final video

[newpball]

I have a very fast lens, its a 50mm f 1.8

That is much better than the standard lens!

as for audio I have the rode, and a bunch of Lapels as well,

Get a basic Tascam or Zoom to record. You'll never look back after you used those guys!

as you said aperture is also flex but will have an effect on the final video

Don't see it as an effect but like photography see it as a creative tool. When you frame the shot you got to think how wide and what needs to be in focus and how much depth of field do I want.

[jaysodyssey]

Get a basic Tascam or Zoom to record. You'll never look back after you used those guys!

I own a tascam IM2 which is phenomenal , but then were talking sync in post the rode will be great for b roll, the lapels for interviews

In photography I always use aperture to narrow the focus for the viewer, things that are distracting are blurred out, while drawing the eye to the main part of the image, so in video I might be interviewing a director of a charity, and have kids playing in the background but slightly out of focus, so people look at the directors face, but still can relate the kids to the charity

stuff like that

[jagabo]

I cannot get over 1\30 for some reason

Because you're shooting at 24 fps. The exposure can't be longer than the duration of one frame.

The reason you want your exposure to be about twice the frame duration is to have an adequate amount of motion blur. 24 fps is very jerky and flickery when you have moderate, high contrast, motion. Adding motion blur reduces that flicker.

[newpball]

I cannot get over 1\30 for some reason

Because you're shooting at 24 fps. The exposure can't be longer than the duration of one frame.

It can, but the effect will be 'dreamy' and 'fragmented'.

[newpball]

Like so:

[jagabo]

That's not really a shutter speed slower than the frame rate. It's just 6 fps video with each frame duplicated 4 times to make 24 fps.

[jaysodyssey]

Hey everyone, hope your weekend is going well, I am going to ATTEMPT to do some night shooting tonight, I will be using all three of my lens and variable settings to see how the camera acts in the night time. Ill share the edit later. I think its important that I do this so that I can get an idea of its nighttime capabilities. I am also going to change the light meter over to spot to see if it helps more or less.

I have some shots planned we will see what develops!

[jaysodyssey]

So I am back, man its hot outside. All tests in this clip were performed with the Rode Videomic pro mounted on the camera. No external lighting on the camera, just the lights of the scene. I noticed on the 50mm lens when I went up to f4-10 i saw some interesting effects on the headlights and streetlights. Honestly this clip allowed me to wake up a bit, i can probably resell this package and get settled into something used that is more documentary style for the trip. I guess being a photographer i wanted to keep the dslr going, but in all honesty I do not see this producing watchable tv in the long run, not to mention switching between the LV and VF to change aperture, and this thing EATS batteries with LV running, which is mandatory for video on this. Takes great pics though, I was able to create some nice Bokeh (which we photogs love) with the 50mm. the key to this trip is something small, variable lens capable, external sound, and lightweight. Something like this camera maybe?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/131548345785

apparently my test is a bit to big for this sites britches so i linked to a site more capable of handling the file

http://bit.ly/1U0rYH5

[jaysodyssey]

Everyone must b e off shopping for the weekend, Cannot wait to hear what you all have to say!

[LMotlow]

Since you asked....

The bitrate below 6MPbs for a 720p mp4 in "available darkness" lighting with motion is too low. No sense working further on that sample. Some of the sections between 1:30 and 3:00 might have been useable with a little contrast masking and levels work, some denoising (common and popular denoisers have already been mentioned), and some serious color grading. But the flood of low bitrate artifacts is an unnecessary pain to work with and makes the low-light CMOS noise look worse.

For the kind of noise and illegal contrast ranges you seem intent on dealing with, your best bet would be Avisynth filters, with a few VirtualDub cleaners that can tweak the initial results if needed, and a good encoder that won't throw noise and compression facts back into your work. The typical and "pro" NLE's from Adobe, SONY, FCP, etc., don't have the ability to address many of those noise problems (unless you want to buy some pro plugins that cost more than the apps do).

Knowing how to set up scenes like the newer sample for proper exposure and later processing are learned through the experience of doing it, experimenting, and learning to use a handful or so of basic filters plus a few enhancements you pick up for special problems along the way. It doesn't take forever to learn this stuff. But you have to accept that the typical "editor" can't do the work. Besides, bad bitrate compression is like shooting yourself in the foot just before the sprint begins.

[jaysodyssey]

Lmotlow,

I imagine some of it is my own fault being inexperienced, however lets face it a DSLR is not practical to shoot a tv series, in any form. Due to my limited budget and time frame I think I am going to pack up the gear and resell it and opt for a true movie camera.

I have been working with others on the LW forum as well, I have my eye on a couple pieces,

The Canon xl2

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-XL2-3CCD-Digital-Video-Camcorder-20x-Zoom-lens-Must-See-...item5678f031f5

as well as the Sony

http://www.ebay.com/itm/371392916601?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT

and also

http://www.ebay.com/itm/131548345785?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT

Of course they are not DSLR cameras thats obvious, I think any one of those will be suited to the task that I will have, i am also aware they are all "dv tape" but even some of the more professional series still use this medium.

"I watch a show called "parts unknown" and was shocked when I emailed one of the producers and he replied they still use tape, not sd cards. He said the reason was because of the durability, and longevity of the tape medium."

So maybe this is the right direction to be heading, i know it will be a damn sight easier to film while holding any one of these thats for sure!

As always I value your thoughts on this forum, since you guys took the time to help me figure this out, when you could have just ignored me. I think any of these cameras will have stronger video quality then the DSLR hands down, but of course this is my opinion and I cannot base it on anything real life!

[newpball]

Here is kind of the high water mark in night shots:

[jaysodyssey]

Lenses used here include the Canon 50mm f/1.2L and 135mm f/2L. Also used are the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8, Leica Summicron-R 90mm f/2, Voigtlander 40mm f/2 Ultron SL II, and a modified Canon 55mm f/1.2 FL lens.

Serious glass!


check out this oldie but goodie,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihDkdlemhSc

in low light

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmVd3UIhj3Y

drool