Jump to content




Photo

Settings Help? - Nikkon D3300 (Unusual amount of noise?)

help nikon d3330 nikon noise video

  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

#1 Trevor Gilman

Trevor Gilman

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 6 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New Jersey

Posted 17 December 2015 - 05:17 PM

Hello,

 

My names Trevor, I've been getting super into film over the past few years and am by no means an expert in the slightest. I got my first camera a few months ago (Nikon D3300), and I know all about settings, set-up, etc, I run on manual. Anyway I've been doing more and more test videos in different situations and no matter where I am no matter how low the ISO is, the shot always seems to have a TON of noise and be very dark. I put a sample shot below.

 

Camera: Nikon D3300

Lens: Kit 18-55mm

 

Settings: 

800 ISO

f. 3.5

 

Any help/advice is extremely appreciated! (Don't know if it's me or the camera but I feel really held back by the quality I'm getting.) Yes I know its very out of focus, wasn't bothering with focusing.

 

8PPgmEa.jpg


Edited by Trevor Gilman, 17 December 2015 - 05:29 PM.

  • 0




#2 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11232 posts
  • Other

Posted 17 December 2015 - 06:41 PM

Doesn't look too terribly bad to me. Can you upload a short original camera clip showing the issue? It's hard to tell when it's a still, sometimes.


  • 0

#3 Trevor Gilman

Trevor Gilman

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 6 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New Jersey

Posted 17 December 2015 - 06:50 PM

Doesn't look too terribly bad to me. Can you upload a short original camera clip showing the issue? It's hard to tell when it's a still, sometimes.

 

Here is the raw video.

Picture looks VERY off to me, can't quite put my finger on what it is but some help would be much appreciated :)


  • 0

#4 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11232 posts
  • Other

Posted 17 December 2015 - 07:12 PM

It's probably better to upload the actual clip from the camera somewhere, as youtube may have recompressed it.

 

Again, doesn't look like there's anything too terribly wrong with it to me. Why not shoot a short clip of a piece of white paper at about 50% exposure, or better yet, go to a photo store and pick yourself up a grey card. Usually noise is more objectionable in the midtones and shadows. Something not involving soft focus and a lot of camera movement may be easier to keep our eyes on.

 

P


  • 0

#5 Bill DiPietra

Bill DiPietra
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2264 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York City

Posted 17 December 2015 - 07:21 PM

I know this sounds simplistic, but it just looks like there isn't much light hitting that part of the room...


  • 0

#6 Trevor Gilman

Trevor Gilman

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 6 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New Jersey

Posted 17 December 2015 - 07:44 PM

Ok thank you for the suggestions. Another quick question while I have both of you here, you may notice that even in areas that are lit pretty well the shot seems kinda dark, any suggestions for that?


  • 0

#7 Bill DiPietra

Bill DiPietra
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2264 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York City

Posted 17 December 2015 - 07:49 PM

Ok thank you for the suggestions. Another quick question while I have both of you here, you may notice that even in areas that are lit pretty well the shot seems kinda dark, any suggestions for that?

 

They look pretty good to me.  I would just do some tests as Phil suggested so that you can get a feel for the camera's dynamic range.  Also test at different ASAs.


  • 0

#8 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11232 posts
  • Other

Posted 17 December 2015 - 07:54 PM

It depends what you're after. What do you want it to look like?

 

P


  • 0

#9 Trevor Gilman

Trevor Gilman

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 6 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New Jersey

Posted 17 December 2015 - 08:00 PM

I want it to look really cinematicy, I know that might sound pretty ignorant or cheesy but, I turned down the contrast and such. Just feel like it isn't coming out in the way that I had expected my stuff to look like. Even just this video I was just watching the quality of the picture looks SOOO different from what I get. 


  • 0

#10 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11232 posts
  • Other

Posted 17 December 2015 - 08:30 PM

The thing I have to tell you, which is going to sound cruel, is that there's no problem with the camera.

What you're seeing is choice of subject, choice of light (often determined by the time of day in that material, as well as time of year and the climate in which it was shot), location, actors, costume...

It isn't about the toys. It's about pointing the camera at something that already looks cool. A bunch of good-looking young people skateboarding in the sunset looks cool, or at least it can be made to look cool. Notice how they frequently shoot the people watching in backlight, and how they left the white balance at daylight so the evening sun looks golden. But mainly it's about the subject.

Not coincidentally, lots of camera crew hate shooting cheap films because you end up inside someone's apartment with cream-coloured walls, and it looks drab and dowdy no matter what you do. The skill is in finding a way - controlling or adding light or picking situations and subjects that look nice.

Step onto the set of a big movie and you'll notice that it already looks cool. It looks cool because of the sets, the way they're designed and built, the way they're painted and dressed. Or because of the awesome location they're paying a fortune for. Because of the costumes and actors and hair and makeup and lighting and framing. It looks cool before the camera ever gets near it. Good camera technique can polish the look, but that's about it. No camera, at any price, has an "awesome" button.

But all is not lost. As a presumably independent filmmaker, your life will become dedicated essentially two things: getting the best possible subjects to shoot, and shooting them in the best possible way. The problem is that the former can be expensive. The joy is that with cameras such as the one you have, gaining expertise in the latter costs nothing but your time.

Watch stuff you like. Be analytical, in terms of what the subject is, where the camera is, how it's framed, where the light is. Make sketches. Try things, and analyse why they suck. Shoot a lot, and critically, make an absolute point of editing what you shoot, so you can gain an understanding of sequences and how sits cut together. You must, must edit what you shoot.

Unfortunately, the problem is not the camera. Fortunately, the problem is solvable - lots of people in this field are self taught. It takes a while.

Welcome to cinematography. We hope you enjoy your stay.

I'm sorry to be so general, but there it is. Keep asking questions here, too.

Phil
  • 0

#11 Trevor Gilman

Trevor Gilman

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 6 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New Jersey

Posted 17 December 2015 - 08:40 PM

Absolutely no offense taken. I appreciate very much that you took the time to write that. I will most certainty take your advice to heart! Thank you!


  • 0

#12 Jay Young

Jay Young
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 380 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Lexington KY

Posted 18 December 2015 - 07:49 AM

Are you sure the camera was in manual mode?

It seems as if the test footage above was metered for the light outside the window, and not the wall.

 

Turn that lamp on and see if it starts to solve your issues!

Also maybe set the camera down?


  • 0

#13 John E Clark

John E Clark
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 780 posts
  • Other
  • San Diego

Posted 18 December 2015 - 01:31 PM

Not coincidentally, lots of camera crew hate shooting cheap films because you end up inside someone's apartment with cream-coloured walls, and it looks drab and dowdy no matter what you do. The skill is in finding a way - controlling or adding light or picking situations and subjects that look nice.
 

 

 

You can have drab cream colored walls... just light them in some way...

 

This was done with Film film... but could just as easily be done in the modern digital age...

"Requiem for a Dream"(2000)

 

maxresdefault.jpg


Edited by John E Clark, 18 December 2015 - 01:33 PM.

  • 0

#14 Bill DiPietra

Bill DiPietra
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2264 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York City

Posted 18 December 2015 - 01:47 PM

I would really refer to the above example as cream-colored walls.  There is a slight greenish tinge to them and - more importantly - they also have a subtle pattern.  I can see there are a lot of compression artifacts, but there also appear to be markings on the walls.


  • 0

#15 John E Clark

John E Clark
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 780 posts
  • Other
  • San Diego

Posted 18 December 2015 - 01:57 PM

I would really refer to the above example as cream-colored walls.  There is a slight greenish tinge to them and - more importantly - they also have a subtle pattern.  I can see there are a lot of compression artifacts, but there also appear to be markings on the walls.

 

 

I'm pretty sure any compression artifacts you see are due to the media that someone had to snap the frame... The film was originally captured on a combination of "Eastman EXR 100T 5248, Fuji Super F-500T 8572", Matthew Libatique the cinematographer.

 

 

But definitely if one has 'dreary walls'... something needs to be done... lighting... spray paint 'vato' or 'maria con juan'... 'random patterns of gang like markings'... of course that would mean one would have to repaint at the end of using the location...


Edited by John E Clark, 18 December 2015 - 01:58 PM.

  • 0

#16 Satsuki Murashige

Satsuki Murashige
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3081 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • San Francisco, CA

Posted 18 December 2015 - 03:55 PM

The thing I have to tell you, which is going to sound cruel, is that there's no problem with the camera.

What you're seeing is choice of subject, choice of light (often determined by the time of day in that material, as well as time of year and the climate in which it was shot), location, actors, costume...

It isn't about the toys. It's about pointing the camera at something that already looks cool. A bunch of good-looking young people skateboarding in the sunset looks cool, or at least it can be made to look cool. Notice how they frequently shoot the people watching in backlight, and how they left the white balance at daylight so the evening sun looks golden. But mainly it's about the subject.

Not coincidentally, lots of camera crew hate shooting cheap films because you end up inside someone's apartment with cream-coloured walls, and it looks drab and dowdy no matter what you do. The skill is in finding a way - controlling or adding light or picking situations and subjects that look nice.

Step onto the set of a big movie and you'll notice that it already looks cool. It looks cool because of the sets, the way they're designed and built, the way they're painted and dressed. Or because of the awesome location they're paying a fortune for. Because of the costumes and actors and hair and makeup and lighting and framing. It looks cool before the camera ever gets near it. Good camera technique can polish the look, but that's about it. No camera, at any price, has an "awesome" button.

But all is not lost. As a presumably independent filmmaker, your life will become dedicated essentially two things: getting the best possible subjects to shoot, and shooting them in the best possible way. The problem is that the former can be expensive. The joy is that with cameras such as the one you have, gaining expertise in the latter costs nothing but your time.

Watch stuff you like. Be analytical, in terms of what the subject is, where the camera is, how it's framed, where the light is. Make sketches. Try things, and analyse why they suck. Shoot a lot, and critically, make an absolute point of editing what you shoot, so you can gain an understanding of sequences and how sits cut together. You must, must edit what you shoot.

Unfortunately, the problem is not the camera. Fortunately, the problem is solvable - lots of people in this field are self taught. It takes a while.

Welcome to cinematography. We hope you enjoy your stay.

I'm sorry to be so general, but there it is. Keep asking questions here, too.

Phil


Great post, Phil. I think the YouTube channel 'DSLR Guide' is a great resource for beginners, in particular this video: http://youtu.be/l_0jn9J_DUo
  • 0

#17 Trevor Gilman

Trevor Gilman

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 6 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New Jersey

Posted 18 December 2015 - 05:14 PM

Great post, Phil. I think the YouTube channel 'DSLR Guide' is a great resource for beginners, in particular this video:

 

Haha I actually have this locked on my favorites bar!


  • 0

#18 Bill DiPietra

Bill DiPietra
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2264 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York City

Posted 18 December 2015 - 05:18 PM

I would really refer to the above example as cream-colored walls. 

 

I know we're kind of beyond this, but I hate typos and had to point out mine: that should read wouldn't, not would.

 

Sorry for the departure.  I now return you to the thread...


  • 0



CineTape

Paralinx LLC

Visual Products

Glidecam

The Slider

Rig Wheels Passport

Tai Audio

Ritter Battery

Zylight

Aerial Filmworks

Technodolly

Abel Cine

Willys Widgets

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Pro 8mm

CineLab

rebotnix Technologies

CineTape

Paralinx LLC

Rig Wheels Passport

Aerial Filmworks

The Slider

Abel Cine

Glidecam

Zylight

Visual Products

CineLab

Ritter Battery

Willys Widgets

Pro 8mm

Tai Audio

rebotnix Technologies

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Technodolly