DJI Mini 3 Pro noise reduction and ISO

[Chapperz]

Hi

I'm a bit baffled about how to use the noise reduction when adjusting ISO. So I get that raising the ISO increases noise, but does does -1 mean less noise reduction or more?

And what settings are you guys using for what type of scene?

Thanks in advance
Regards

 

[EssenYVR]

If it works like all the other stuff I've used, plus numbers mean more (noise reduction) and minus mean less.

 

[Chapperz]

If it works like all the other stuff I've used, plus numbers mean more (noise reduction) and minus mean less.

Yeah just did a little test and apparently anything above 400 is crap on the mini 3 Pro... ISO400 and +1 NR on the screen on the RC is about as good as it gets.

 

[lensimages]

Hi

I'm a bit baffled about how to use the noise reduction when adjusting ISO. So I get that raising the ISO increases noise, but does does -1 mean less noise reduction or more?

And what settings are you guys using for what type of scene?

Thanks in advance
Regards

ISO, 100 ISO on a bright day in the morning let’s in light, but as the light fades as it gets darker towards the evening you need more light so 400 ISO makes the camera sensor more sensitive to light, but as you increase the ISO it will eventually introduce what is called noise which will show up in the image after printing. Cheers Len

 

[Dronecation]

Yeah just did a little test and apparently anything above 400 is crap on the mini 3 Pro... ISO400 and +1 NR on the screen on the RC is about as good as it gets.

I shoot 800 and 1000 ISO and after raw processing, the images look rather good. I use DxO, PS and Topaz on the raw images to get a clean look.

 

[offtheback]

I shoot 800 and 1000 ISO and after raw processing, the images look rather good. I use DxO, PS and Topaz on the raw images to get a clean look.

The latest version of Lightroom has a very good noise reduction feature.

 

[Chapperz]

OK so I just did a little test and I was mistaken about one thing before... I thought I was saving in j+raw but apparently I was just saving in jpeg

So I did another test with j+raw at different sharpness and noise reduction settings.

All at 48mp

-2 shrp -2 NR
-2 shrp -1 NR
-0 shrp -0 NR

And at every setting the jpeg looked decent when zoomed in but the DNG was utter trash!!!

It looks like the style (sharpness and noise reduction) settings do nothing at all to raw. Can someone please tell me if that's normal and if so, what's the point of having the settings in the 1st place?

I'll have to wait until I can get back to my PC to see if I can get the same quality in post but I doubt it.

Would DJI do that deliberately to force people to buy a more expensive PRO drone to get higher res images that are usable in the context of larger prints?

Non of this makes sense to me

 

[MS Coast]

It looks like the style (sharpness and noise reduction) settings do nothing at all to raw. Can someone please tell me if that's normal and if so, what's the point of having the settings in the 1st place?

Isn't that the very definition of a raw file - that there's no in-camera image processing?

 

[Chapperz]

Isn't that the very definition of a raw file - that there's no in-camera image processing?

I dunno I'm a noob... That's why I asked the question if it's normal

 

[MS Coast]

I dunno I'm a noob... That's why I asked the question if it's normal

Yep, it's normal. The raw files will have no processing done by the drone's camera.

If you're after the best possible photo quality and the maximum flexibility for post-processing (editing photos on a computer after you've downloaded them from the drone), then raw files are the way to go. It's a more complex process and something you might want to put off tinkering with until later and you get deeper into photo editing.

The photo and video processing done by the drone is very good, and it's perfectly fine for most applications - for viewing on phones, computers, most television sets, and reasonable sized prints. I'd guess that 95 - 98% of drone fliers use the photos and videos directly from the drone and never shoot raw.

Regarding ISO, keep it as low as possible for the best image quality. The auto settings do a fine job under most circumstances. You can also use pro mode and fix the ISO at a low value and allow the auto function to control the shutter speed.

Unsolicited simple tip - many people like to underexpose their photos and videos slightly, using the exposure bias control, EV on the controller screen. -0.3 or -0.7 makes the colors look a bit richer.

If you have a really spectacular scene and want some "insurance" on getting the right exposure, use the AEB photo option to automatically shoot a range of exposures.

Have fun.

 

[Chapperz]

Yep, it's normal. The raw files will have no processing done by the drone's camera.

If you're after the best possible photo quality and the maximum flexibility for post-processing (editing photos on a computer after you've downloaded them from the drone), then raw files are the way to go. It's a more complex process and something you might want to put off tinkering with until later and you get deeper into photo editing.

The photo and video processing done by the drone is very good, and it's perfectly fine for most applications - for viewing on phones, computers, most television sets, and reasonable sized prints. I'd guess that 95 - 98% of drone fliers use the photos and videos directly from the drone and never shoot raw.

Regarding ISO, keep it as low as possible for the best image quality. The auto settings do a fine job under most circumstances. You can also use pro mode and fix the ISO at a low value and allow the auto function to control the shutter speed.

Unsolicited simple tip - many people like to underexpose their photos and videos slightly, using the exposure bias control, EV on the controller screen. -0.3 or -0.7 makes the colors look a bit richer.

If you have a really spectacular scene and want some "insurance" on getting the right exposure, use the AEB photo option to automatically shoot a range of exposures.

Have fun.

Ahhhh that clears a lot up for me... Thanks for taking the time... It's appreciated.

 

[Robert Prior]

Ahhhh that clears a lot up for me... Thanks for taking the time... It's appreciated.

It is better to reduce an exposure in post-processing than it is to increase it (less noise), so exposing as much as possible without blowing the highlights is what you are aiming for.

Look at the exposure histogram. Ideally you want to skew as far right as you can without clipping. Turn on the zebra stripes (overexposure warning) to make certain that you aren't over-exposing anything important, but you want a brighter image if possible.

I suggest shooting with the exposure bracketed (AEB) and saving raw+jpeg.

 

[Chapperz]

It is better to reduce an exposure in post-processing than it is to increase it (less noise), so exposing as much as possible without blowing the highlights is what you are aiming for.

Look at the exposure histogram. Ideally you want to skew as far right as you can without clipping. Turn on the zebra stripes (overexposure warning) to make certain that you aren't over-exposing anything important, but you want a brighter image if possible.

I suggest shooting with the exposure bracketed (AEB) and saving raw+jpeg.

That's literally the exact opposite to what everyone else is saying so I'll have to try that out... That said, won't slightly over exposing things create / increase CA?

 

[EssenYVR]

Isn't that the very definition of a raw file - that there's no in-camera image processing?

Raw usually implies that there is not only no in-camera processing, but that the file contains more data than you could get in a JPG. For example, raw files from stills cameras often contain 12-bits of colour depth information, far more than the 8 bits that standard JPG supports. That gives you a lot more latitude to push and pull the tonal curve in post processing.

A problem with small sensors such as in drones like the Mini 3 Pro is that the sensor itself isn't really capable of capturing that much colour depth. I've tried the M3P 10-bit video mode and for the life of me I can't get anything more out of it than is recorded in the standard 8-bit video mode.

 

[Robert Prior]

That's literally the exact opposite to what everyone else is saying so I'll have to try that out... That said, won't slightly over exposing things create / increase CA?

When I started digital photography I did the same thing everyone else is recommending — slightly underexposing. It was the conventional wisdom at the time, probably because that's what you did with film.

Then I learned from David duChemin (professional photographer) that digital sensors work very differently and don't just emulate film. The bottom half of the exposure range in the histogram only captures about 1/4 of the data, while the top half captures about 3/4. This means that you have more information to play with when lowering highlights than you do when raising shadows. All assuming that you aren't clipping at either end, of course. The big problems with raising shadows are noise and banding.

The trick is that you need to process differently, and shoot what looks like too-bright pictures knowing what you will do with them in post to make them look like what you want. In a way it's very Ansel Adams-ish, with the raw file being the score and the final file being the symphony.

I'll try to dig out more details later this week. I've been shooting bracketed and processing as HDR for so long* I'm a bit fuzzy on his recommended workflow. I remember it being pretty simple and quick, but (to me, anyway) nonintuitive.


*A consequence of shooting spherical panoramas outdoors — with the sun in the frame there's always more dynamic range than the sensor can handle.

 

[Chapperz]

When I started digital photography I did the same thing everyone else is recommending — slightly underexposing. It was the conventional wisdom at the time, probably because that's what you did with film.

Then I learned from David duChemin (professional photographer) that digital sensors work very differently and don't just emulate film. The bottom half of the exposure range in the histogram only captures about 1/4 of the data, while the top half captures about 3/4. This means that you have more information to play with when lowering highlights than you do when raising shadows. All assuming that you aren't clipping at either end, of course. The big problems with raising shadows are noise and banding.

The trick is that you need to process differently, and shoot what looks like too-bright pictures knowing what you will do with them in post to make them look like what you want. In a way it's very Ansel Adams-ish, with the raw file being the score and the final file being the symphony.

I'll try to dig out more details later this week. I've been shooting bracketed and processing as HDR for so long* I'm a bit fuzzy on his recommended workflow. I remember it being pretty simple and quick, but (to me, anyway) nonintuitive.


*A consequence of shooting spherical panoramas outdoors — with the sun in the frame there's always more dynamic range than the sensor can handle.

Thinking about it, it makes perfect sense. I'm definitely going to have a bash at it.

 

[Chapperz]

When I started digital photography I did the same thing everyone else is recommending — slightly underexposing. It was the conventional wisdom at the time, probably because that's what you did with film.

Then I learned from David duChemin (professional photographer) that digital sensors work very differently and don't just emulate film. The bottom half of the exposure range in the histogram only captures about 1/4 of the data, while the top half captures about 3/4. This means that you have more information to play with when lowering highlights than you do when raising shadows. All assuming that you aren't clipping at either end, of course. The big problems with raising shadows are noise and banding.

The trick is that you need to process differently, and shoot what looks like too-bright pictures knowing what you will do with them in post to make them look like what you want. In a way it's very Ansel Adams-ish, with the raw file being the score and the final file being the symphony.

I'll try to dig out more details later this week. I've been shooting bracketed and processing as HDR for so long* I'm a bit fuzzy on his recommended workflow. I remember it being pretty simple and quick, but (to me, anyway) nonintuitive.


*A consequence of shooting spherical panoramas outdoors — with the sun in the frame there's always more dynamic range than the sensor can handle.

OK I've looked into it and I'm sold...

 

[Chapperz]

When I started digital photography I did the same thing everyone else is recommending — slightly underexposing. It was the conventional wisdom at the time, probably because that's what you did with film.

Then I learned from David duChemin (professional photographer) that digital sensors work very differently and don't just emulate film. The bottom half of the exposure range in the histogram only captures about 1/4 of the data, while the top half captures about 3/4. This means that you have more information to play with when lowering highlights than you do when raising shadows. All assuming that you aren't clipping at either end, of course. The big problems with raising shadows are noise and banding.

The trick is that you need to process differently, and shoot what looks like too-bright pictures knowing what you will do with them in post to make them look like what you want. In a way it's very Ansel Adams-ish, with the raw file being the score and the final file being the symphony.

I'll try to dig out more details later this week. I've been shooting bracketed and processing as HDR for so long* I'm a bit fuzzy on his recommended workflow. I remember it being pretty simple and quick, but (to me, anyway) nonintuitive.


*A consequence of shooting spherical panoramas outdoors — with the sun in the frame there's always more dynamic range than the sensor can handle.

Ahhhhhh it's like using audio in a way... Signal to noise. If your input signal is low, when you turn up the gain to compensate you turn up the noise that's inherent in your amp. If you give it enough signal to start with you don't have to add gain or at least as much but obviously you don't want to clip.

---

DJI Mini 3 features the dual native ISO values of ISO 100 and ISO 800.
Photo mode and video mode (24/25/30fps): The sensor will algorithmically integrate the images gained by the two sets of analog amplifier circuits for a better dynamic range of actual imaging.
Video mode (48/50/60fps): When you set an ISO value below 800, the drone will use the low-gain analog amplifier circuit. When you set an ISO value above or equal to 800, the drone will use the high-gain analog amplifier circuit.

I know a little bit about audio and I know that not all amps are created equally... I suppose it's too much to ask for premium amps for such a price in such a small package, hence the reason I personally think that over ISO400 with the dji mini 3 Pro... Forget it but, more signal to start with.

I suppose then, slower shutter speed to up the signal but, then we run the risk of getting motion blur?


Am I on the right track here?

 

[Chapperz]

When I started digital photography I did the same thing everyone else is recommending — slightly underexposing. It was the conventional wisdom at the time, probably because that's what you did with film.

Then I learned from David duChemin (professional photographer) that digital sensors work very differently and don't just emulate film. The bottom half of the exposure range in the histogram only captures about 1/4 of the data, while the top half captures about 3/4. This means that you have more information to play with when lowering highlights than you do when raising shadows. All assuming that you aren't clipping at either end, of course. The big problems with raising shadows are noise and banding.

The trick is that you need to process differently, and shoot what looks like too-bright pictures knowing what you will do with them in post to make them look like what you want. In a way it's very Ansel Adams-ish, with the raw file being the score and the final file being the symphony.

I'll try to dig out more details later this week. I've been shooting bracketed and processing as HDR for so long* I'm a bit fuzzy on his recommended workflow. I remember it being pretty simple and quick, but (to me, anyway) nonintuitive.


*A consequence of shooting spherical panoramas outdoors — with the sun in the frame there's always more dynamic range than the sensor can handle.

Ahhhh... I just read that contrary to the literature, the mini 3 Pro dual ISO works at 100 and 500. So the fact that I noticed a big increase in noise from 400 to 800 stands to reason for me... As in it wasn't linear... It was like an on/off switch.

 

[Robert Prior]

Ahhhh... I just read that contrary to the literature, the mini 3 Pro dual ISO works at 100 and 500. So the fact that I noticed a big increase in noise from 400 to 800 stands to reason for me... As in it wasn't linear... It was like an on/off switch.

I've been shooting with ISO 100 with my Mini 3 Pro. Haven't even tried other settings.