Tag: Photography

Adobe Lightroom ISO Specific Noise Reduction Pre-Sets Canon EOS R1

Posted in Workshops and Expeditions6 Comments

Over the last few years, I have created ISO Specific and Adaptive Noise Reduction pre-sets for the Canon EOS 1DXMK3, Canon EOS R3 and Canon EOS R5 MKII. These time-saving pre-sets have since been downloaded, tested and adopted by many other Canon 1DXMK3, R3 and 5D MKII users as their working defaults. The feedback we have received to date on our work in this area has been fantastic and ongoing – Thank you.

I received the new Canon flagship EOS R1 about a week ago and have been very busy analysing its RAW files in great detail to create a set of ISO Specific Noise Reduction Pre-sets specific to the R1. After spending most of the last few days locked in my studio, staring at my computer screens and analysing the files in great detail, I have created optimized noise pre-sets for the Canon EOS R1. If you would like to take advantage of these finished and optimized pre-sets (including the test RAW files), you can purchase them through my store, Melrakki Publishing, HERE, for just $20. These pre-sets represent days of work to complete, so we ask that you please support this work by purchasing them if you want to take advantage of them.

PURCHASE CANON EOS R1 LIGHTROOM NOISE REDUCTION PRESETS HERE

If you are only interested in how the Canon EOS R1 stacks up and performs, then I will save you the long read – here is the conclusion: The EOS R1 significantly ups the game with performance that demonstrably exceeds the EOS R3 and EOS 1DX MK3. When comparing EOS R1 high ISO files against either the EOS 1DX MK3 or the EOS R3, it is clear that Canon has made forward strides in high-ISO sensor development. Directly comparing ISO 12,800, 25,600, 51,200 and 102,400 on the EOS R1 to either the EOS R3 or EOS 1DX MK3 shows that the sensor in the EOS R1 retains more fine textural detail at these high ISO settings. Fine hairs and ultra-fine detail are clearer and more accurately rendered by the EOS R1. The grain structure is also more organic and ‘film-like’, and it appears less ‘digital’ than previously tested cameras. In addition, the EOS R1 files are more malleable and more resilient to abuse of the Lightroom Noise Reduction sliders while producing a more natural result. Extreme settings of these sliders render more pleasing and preferred results than either the EOS R3 or EOS 1DX MK3 sensors. The EOS R1 is also the first sensor tested to facilitate a workable, high ISO of 25,600 without losing detail in real-world RAW files. Based on my testing experience, the EOS R1 represents the very pinnacle of Canon’s digital sensors, with high ISO performance that outperforms any other sensor tested to date. I have no hesitation in personally shooting the EOS R1 at ISO settings up to and including ISO 25,600. As long as your files are well exposed, the EOS R1 can render superb results that retain ultra-fine detail even at this extreme ISO.

I previously included some critical history of creating these pre-sets in a detailed post HERE. Much of this information is again included below as it is highly relevant to how these pre-sets were optimised. Before embarking on this journey, I reached out to a close colleague and engineer at Adobe who is heavily involved in the coding of Lightroom and who shed some fantastic additional light on what some of the sliders are doing ‘under the hood’ before I began developing these presets. I have been using Lightroom since its beta days and have a better-than-average grasp and understanding of what is happening under the hood with most sliders. However, I was able to learn a thing or two that has helped me significantly optimise these pre-sets, and I want to share this information as it is critical to understanding how to set the Noise sliders properly and how they have been applied in the pre-sets I have created. Even if you don’t own a Canon EOS R1, R5 MK2, 1DXMK3 or R3, this information will be relevant and valuable to you. Importantly, this information has been applied to produce these presets, so when you purchase and install these specific noise presets, you can rest assured you are getting the best possible result.

Detail Panel Settings: Before I get into the methodology, I want to make the critical point that both the Detail panel sharpness and noise reduction sliders in Lightroom are interactive. Adjusting one slider is not enough in most instances, and significant back-and-forth play between the sliders is required to set them optimally.

Methodology: Over the last few days, I have done extensive testing and analysis in creating these ISO-specific noise reduction pre-sets for the Canon EOS R1. To make them, I photographed a large X-Rite Color Checker (A4 video version) in a D6500 light-controlled graphic light workstation with the Canon EOS R1 and an RF 85mm f1.2 L series lens at f5.6 at every single ISO stop from 50 to 102,400. Technically, you can push the EOS R1 to H1 ISO 204,800, and the ultra-extreme H2 to ISO 409,600, but RAW files at these extreme ISO settings break down so badly that it is little more than a marketing gimmick. Thankfully, this extreme ISO range is disabled by default in the EOS R1, and that is how I suggest you leave it – permanently. For the curious amongst you, there is no saving ISO 409,600. Even ISO 102,400 should be used as an absolute last resort. Whilst ISO 50 is an option on the Canon EOS R1 and has no noise of consequence, it does have a more limited dynamic range (approximately one stop less) than ISO100 and, as such, is not recommended. You are better off using a Neutral Density filter if you need to shoot at ISO lower than 100. All of that said, the pre-sets do include Noise Reduction for the the full ISO range from ISO 50 all the way to ISO 409,600.

1/3rd stops are ‘push’ or ‘pull’ ISO stops that use in camera software ‘under the hood’ to adjust the exposure +/- 1/3rd of a stop accordingly. As such, I never use 1/3rd stop ISO increments and have my EOS R1 cameras set to full stop ISO only. I also find that when I am shooting in the field, I prefer one click to go from ISO 400 to 800, for example, instead of having to make multiple clicks to gain a stop of light. Noise Reduction pre-sets are included for 1/3rd stop increments for those who like to shoot this way or who prefer to shoot Auto ISO.

Aperture priority was used meter as read (no exposure compensation), and only the ISO and shutter speed were varied. The X-Rite Color Checker was used as it enabled me to carefully monitor and check for noise in the shadows and because I wanted to be able to check for individual colour shifts, mottling, speckling and bleeding at each specific ISO in very specific colours. It should be said that any differences in colour shift would, in all likelihood, not be visible in normal photographic scenes, but using the X-Rite Colour Checker makes it far easier to visually detect shifts or bleed in colour and thus makes it far easier to apply optimal noise reduction in Lightroom.

The RAW files were imported into Lightroom with the Adobe Color Profile and carefully analysed at 100%, 200% 400% and 800% magnification. Unlike sharpening, which must be gauged at 1:1 100% magnification, Noise Reduction requires additional zooming. With some noise control sliders, it is necessary to zoom in significantly to see the differences as you adjust the sliders. I spent the better part of three days just staring at these RAW files at different magnifications and visually comparing them side by side as I tweaked the settings in the detail panel for each ISO. The goal was never to make ISO 102,400 look as good as ISO 100 (that simply is not possible); instead, ISO 100 was used as a reference point for all other ISO RAW files to be compared. Then, the sliders were adjusted for each full stop of ISO difference. In other words, the goal was to make ISO 200 look as close as possible to ISO100, ISO 400 as close as possible to ISO200, etc., all the way up to making ISO102,400 look as close as possible to ISO 51,200. Once this was done and checked I then went back and compared the results two full ISO stops difference and then three full stops difference and tweaked further. Finally, I rechecked my settings and results over three days to satisfy myself that I could not optimise them further. It is worth noting that ISO 102,400 and above are the most difficult ISO ranges to make look ‘good’. Hence, they have the highest degree of tweaking in the pre-set. Even with this optimised pre-set for ISO 102,400, I strongly encourage you to avoid this ISO and the ultra-extreme H1 and H2 ISO settings at all costs. In real practical terms, I recommend setting a virtual ceiling of ISO 25,600. Exceed 25,600, and fine details begins to get lost. At ISO 51,200, fine detail and texture continue to disappear, although it’s arguable if this will be visible in well-exposed real-world captures. In actual practical every day use, I try not to exceed ISO 12,800 with the EOS R1 and prefer to shoot at ISO400 as my baseline. I will happily go to ISO 25,600 before I start worrying too much about noise, with ISO 51,200 being my absolute ceiling. It is worth noting that all of the above is contingent upon a well-exposed RAW file. If you underexpose your file the results will likely be quite different.

I used two high-end displays to visually analyze the RAW files: the BenQ SW272U, which I reviewed HERE, and an Eizo Colour Edge CG2700X. Both displays are high-end Adobe RGB, 4K, and were optimally calibrated to D6500K with a setting of 80 candelas, which is appropriate for the light levels in my viewing studio. I utilised two different monitors as I discovered that different displays render slightly differently, and it was necessary to optimise and average across the different monitors. It should be noted that if you are using a laptop screen, you are at a very significant disadvantage in rendering colour and analysing noise. In fact, making any sort of colour-critical decisions on a laptop display is a terrible idea. If you do not own a high-quality photographic display and care about your images, this should be your next purchase.

Noise Reduction and ETTR: When setting the sliders in the Detail panel for sharpness and noise reduction I erred on the side of caution and was very deliberately cautious and judicious in the amount being applied. The primary reason for this is I did not want overly aggressive noise reduction in these pre-sets. Since exposing to the right (ETTR) is optimal in the field (without clipping the highlights), tweaking the exposure down in Lightroom during post-production results in lower levels of noise than under-exposing or even exposing ‘meter as read’. In other words, the pre-sets are optimised for RAW files that were optimally exposed in the field. If you are applying these pre-sets to an under-exposed photograph that you are ‘brightening’ considerably in Lightroom, you may well need to apply additional noise reduction. Thus, the pre-sets will work optimally when you have exposed optimally in the field.

Problem Files: If you have a particularly noisy and problematic file, you may be better off using a third-party Noise Reduction program in addition to the ISO-specific pre-sets I have created. I am currently using both Lightroom AI Denoise and Topaz De-Noise for any file that is particularly problematic in addition to the ISO-specific pre-set. Think of the ISO-specific pre-set as a starting point for problem files. Don’t try to apply them to a file you have already processed and expect a magical result.

Camera Profiles: Adobe encountered some difficulties building camera-specific profiles for Canon models (including the EOS 1DXMK3 and R series cameras) because of the switch to the new CR3 file format. Adobe has since resolved this issue and resumed offering camera-specific profiles. For these pre-sets for the Canon EOS R1, I used the standard default Adobe Color profile. I recommend not getting too hung up on Camera profiles as changing profiles may improve the look of specific files in certain situations, but once you start twiddling the processing dials in Lightroom, all bets are off as to which may give a better result. Since ‘Adobe Color’ is the default, it made sense to use this as the baseline for the Noise Reduction pre-sets.

Sharpening Amount: The pre-sets vary from ISO to ISO, and some of the ISO pre-sets include a component of Sharpening above the default setting of 40. Since Sharpening and Noise Reduction are interactive and affect each other (that is why they appear together in the Detail panel of Lightroom), it is necessary at some higher ISO settings to add additional sharpening to counter the ‘digital smoothing’ of the RAW file that results from higher amounts of Noise Reduction. This additional sharpening kicks in from ISO1600 in the pre-sets for the EOS R1. The sharpening amounts applied in the pre-sets are a cautious baseline. In other words, where sharpening has been applied at a given ISO pre-set it is only enough to counter the digital smoothing applied by the noise reduction algorithm. You will still need to add additional capture sharpening to your file. The amount of additional capture sharpening you will need to apply will vary depending on the quality of your lens, the sharpness of the capture and the atmospheric conditions at the time of capture.

Sharpening Radius: None of the pre-sets alter the Radius since the correct setting will vary depending on your particular capture. Photographs with a lot of high-frequency information will generally want a lower Radius (less than 1), and photographs with mostly low-frequency information (think portraits) will necessitate a higher Radius. The default setting of 1 is a good general setting and, thus, is not touched in the pre-sets.

Sharpening Detail: Sharpening detail is quite a complicated slider requiring more explanation. When adjusted to the left, toward 0, the Detail Slider applies halo suppression, which limits how strong the halos are in your number settings. Moving the slider past 25 (the default) causes the slider to change its behaviour and apply a type of deconvolution sharpening similar to the de-blur tool in Photoshop. Deconvolution sharpening attempts to de-blur an image based on what type of blur it detects in an image. The thing to keep in mind is that excessive use of the sharpening detail slider will substantially increase the sharpening of the noise. Generally speaking, if you set the amount and radius correctly, there is little need to change the detail slider, and the default setting of 25 is appropriate.

Sharpening Masking: None of the ISO-specific pre-sets include any masking component. Since masking is image-specific, you will need to apply this based on the requirements of your specific image.

Luminance Noise Reduction: Lightroom does not apply Luminance Noise Reduction by default, so the pre-sets mainly optimise the Luminance, Detail, and Contrast sliders. No luminance noise reduction is applied below ISO 800 in the pre-sets. It simply is not required in Canon EOS R1 files. Even ISO1600 pre-sets only have a very low setting for luminance noise reduction, and it could be argued that this is unnecessary in some cases. Visible differences in grain structure are only discernable with RAW test images at high magnification (200%, 400% and 800%). Nevertheless, a small amount of luminance noise reduction is beneficial in ISO1600 files when correctly exposed. Underexposed files may require additional noise reduction.

A note on Grain Structure: It can be tempting to apply additional Luminance Noise Reduction to high ISO files when viewed at 200%, 400% or 800% to try and make high ISO files look as smooth as low ISO files. The problem with this approach is it can lead to artificial, non-organic looking grain structure when viewed at a more nominal 100%. Back-and-forth testing led me to deduce that the best ‘looking’ grain structure is obtained by making Luminance Noise Reduction adjustments at 100% magnification only.

Luminance Noise Detail: This control sets the noise threshold. Dragging the slider to the right will preserve more detail; however, it does cause some noise to be incorrectly detected as detail and, therefore, will not be ‘smoothed’. Decreasing the slider will increase ‘smoothing’ but cause some details to be incorrectly detected as noise and smoothed out. The Luminance Noise Detail slider is only activated when some Luminance Noise reduction is applied. The default value once activated is 50, and setting this slider optimally for high ISO images is a bit of a balancing act. Luminance Detail kicks in at ISO12800 in the pre-sets for the EOS R1 (it kicks in at ISO 6400 for the Canon EOS 1DX MK3 and EOS R3). If you are shooting at 1/3rd stops the Luminance Noise Detail kicks in at ISO 10,000. The Canon EOS R1 sensor behaves very differently to any of the previously tested cameras (Canon EOS 1DX MK3, Canon EOS R3 and Canon EOS R5 MKII). Unlike these previous cameras, ISO settings above ISO 25,600 on the EOS R1 do not require a reduction in the luminance noise detail slider to be applied to reduce noise being incorrectly detected as detail (except for the H2 ISO 409,600). The EOS R1 sensor is the best I have reviewed in this regard. Put in plain English, it produces a much cleaner file than any of the other cameras. A lot of testing and care went into the amount applied in the pre-sets. This is where a lot of high magnification zooming (up to 800%) was used to discern differences in the settings.

Luminance Contrast: Like the Luminance Noise Detail slider, the Luminance Contrast slider is only activated when some Luminance Noise reduction is applied. Dragging this slider to the right preserves image texture and contrast but results in the potential for mottling in high ISO images and re-introducing noise. Leaving it at the default setting of 0 helps with fine-grained, smooth results. Like the Luminance Noise Detail slider, setting this slider optimally at higher ISO images is a balancing act between adding contrast, enhancing surface texture and avoiding mottling and more noise. Luminance Contrast kicks in at ISO25600 in the pre-sets for the EOS R1 (or ISO 20,000 if you are shooting 1/3rd stops). Again, a lot of testing and a lot of care went into the amount applied in the pre-sets. It should be noted that the Canon EOS R1 sensor behaves better than any previously reviewed sensor. It is necessary to make extreme adjustments to the Luminance Contrast slider to provoke mottling in high ISO images.

Colour Noise Reduction: Lightroom does apply a default Color noise reduction of ’25’. What is critical to understand is that the default of 25 for RAW files is a baseline of colour noise reduction. You should think of the value of 25 not in an absolute sense but in an ISO-normalised sense.  What this means is that for a very clean image, like an ISO 100 RAW file from the Canon EOS R1, the Colour Noise Reduction slider, in general, is doing very little because the image is so clean, to begin with.  On an ISO 25600 image from the same camera, though, Color Noise Reduction of 25 is going to do quite a bit more.  In other words, how much work goes on under the hood for “Color Noise reduction = 25” depends both on the camera model and the ISO because Adobe calibrate each camera model and ISO, and the Color Noise Reduction slider is “aware” of this. This means that even on a very clean image like ISO 100 from a Canon EOS R1, you don’t have to worry about damaging the image quality by leaving Color Noise Reduction at 25, because Colour Noise Reduction will do very little in this case. Since the Colour Noise slider at its default setting of 25 is applying adaptive noise reduction that is both camera and ISO-specific, it is not altered in any of the pre-sets from its default setting. I did spend quite a lot of time trying to tweak this slider at various ISO settings but I came to the visual conclusion that the results are optimal at the default setting of 25 (Adobe have done excellent work in this area). Applying more than 25 very quickly results in colour bleeding that is sub-optimal. Be very careful if you start tweaking this slider.

Colour Detail: The colour detail slider is most useful for extremely noisy images. It allows you to refine colour noise reduction for thin, detailed colour edges. In essence, at very high settings of 75+, Lightroom tries to retain colour edges but at the expense of colour speckles. At lower settings, the slider works to suppress colour speckles, but thin features may become desaturated (colour bleeding). In order to see the effect, it is really necessary to zoom in at least 200% or 400%. Colour Detail kicks in from ISO 25,600 in the pre-sets (or ISO 20,000 if you are shooting 1/3rd stops). Again, it is necessary to make fairly extreme adjustments to the sliders at high magnification to actually provoke speckles in the Canon EOS R1 files.

Colour Smoothness: The colour smoothness slider defaults at 50, and at moderate settings below 50, it can be used to ‘smooth’ colour. Above 50, it can be used to suppress colour blotching or mottling. At very high settings, it may cause some desaturation of colour at the edges, so a lot of care needs to be taken when setting this slider. Colour smoothing kicks in only from ISO 25,600 in the pre-sets (or ISO 20,000 if you are shooting 1/3rd stops).

Lens Corrections: No lens corrections are applied in any of the ISO-specific noise pre-sets.

Canon EOS R1 Comments: With the ISO-specific Adaptive noise reduction pre-sets applied between ISO 50 and ISO 3200, there is no appreciable difference in noise in real-world RAW files – they are close enough to be considered identical at 100% magnification. By ISO 6400, only the tiniest minute surface texture, discernible at 400% or more magnification, is just starting to disappear (You would never ever notice this in real-world captures and have to really look for it at extreme magnification). At 100% there is no discernable difference between ISO 3200 and ISO6400. By ISO 12800, ultra-fine surface textures are just starting to disappear from the RAW file when viewed at 200% or more on-screen (again, you will never notice this in real-world captures). At ISO 25,600, the finest surface textures disappear, and ultra-minute fine detail is also starting to disappear. Fine hairs are still visible and look good, but the finest ultra-minute detail is now obscured. Again, you will not notice this in real-world RAW captures (You really have to look for it in a test image at 200% or more magnification). Nevertheless, my recommendation is that ISO 25,600 is a realistic workable limit. Above ISO 25,600 both texture and fine detail continue to disappear as the ISO increases. ISO 51,200 has a noticeable loss in ultra-fine detail compared to ISO 25,600. At ISO 51,200 the finest surface textures are gone. The smallest fine hairs are no longer visible and are lost in the increased grain structure (which remains organic). Toward the top end at ISO 102,400 we have lost most surface texture and most fine hair detail. ISO 102,400 is an absolute last resort and is to be avoided at all costs. I strongly recommend you leave ISO 102,400 disabled and set your absolute ceiling at ISO 51,200 with a realistic limit of ISO 25,600. The pre-sets do their best to make ISO 102,400 look as good as possible, but in reality, there is no helping ISO 102,400 and above.

Side Note: Canon EOS R1 vs. EOS R5 MK2 vs. Canon EOS R3 vs. Canon EOS 1DXMK3 Comments: RAW files from the Canon EOS R1, R5MK2, EOS R3 and the Canon EOS 1DXMK3 were compared and analysed at 100%, 200%, 400% and 800% magnification side-by-side in Lightroom. Directly comparing the RAW files shows no discernable or appreciable difference in noise between ISO 50 and ISO 51,200 for the EOS R3 and the EOS 1DXMK3. Side by side, it is impossible to pick one from the other in a blind test. At ISO 102,400, the Canon 1DXMK3 has a very slight advantage in grain structure, although it is likely this difference would never be visible in real-world photographs. What this demonstrates is that noise levels more or less plateaued in digital sensors of this 24-megapixel resolution when the R3 was released. Despite the Canon EOS R3 having a BSI sensor with a few more pixels, there is no real advantage in noise over the sensor in the Canon EOS 1DXMK3. The Canon EOS R5 MK2 has more noise than both the Canon EOS R3 and EOS 1DXMK3 because of its higher pixel density. It should be noted that the performance of the EOS R5MK2 is exceptional for a camera with 45 megapixels. However, it is not in the same league as either the EOS R3 or the EOS 1DX MK3 (or the EOS R1 – see below) when it comes to high ISO noise performance.

The EOS R1 significantly ups the game with performance that demonstrably exceeds the EOS R3 and EOS 1DX MK3. When comparing EOS R1 high ISO files against either the EOS 1DX MK3 or the EOS R3, it is clear that Canon has made forward strides in high-ISO sensor development. Directly comparing ISO 12,800, 25,600, 51,200 and 102,400 on the EOS R1 to either the EOS R3 or EOS 1DX MK3 shows that the sensor in the EOS R1 retains more fine textural detail at these high ISO settings. Fine hairs and ultra-fine detail are clearer and more accurately rendered by the EOS R1. The grain structure is also more organic and ‘film-like’, and it appears less ‘digital’ than previously tested cameras. In addition, the EOS R1 files are more malleable and more resilient to abuse of the Lightroom Noise Reduction sliders while producing a more natural result. Extreme settings of these sliders render more pleasing and preferred results than either the EOS R3 or EOS 1DX MK3 sensors. The EOS R1 is also the first sensor tested to facilitate a workable, high ISO of 25,600 without losing detail in real-world RAW files. Based on my testing experience, the EOS R1 represents the very pinnacle of Canon’s digital sensors, with high ISO performance that outperforms any other sensor tested to date. I have no hesitation in personally shooting the EOS R1 at ISO settings up to and including ISO 25,600. As long as your files are well exposed, the EOS R1 can render superb results that retain ultra-fine detail even at this extreme ISO.

What About Lightroom AI Noise Reduction?: Lightroom offers the capability to apply AI Noise Reduction in the ‘Develop module’. Be aware that the application of AI Noise Reduction overrides any Noise Reduction preset you may have used. If you (manually or otherwise via preset) adjust the Noise Reduction sliders prior to running Denoise, those slider values will be reset to zero on the new DNG, and the effect of those sliders will not be baked into the DNG.  In other words, the new DNG will have only AI Denoise applied and no manual/legacy NR applied.  So, it’s as if you’re starting fresh. The reason for this behaviour is that AI Denoise was trained and designed to be used alone, without any of the manual Noise Reduction applied.  This said, Adobe recognizes that in some cases, even with AI Denoise, there may be some residual noise that a photographer may wish to clean up manually afterwards, so the manual Noise Reduction controls remain available to use “on top of” AI Denoise.

So why apply a Noise Reduction Pre-set?: Simply put, the noise reduction preset can be applied automatically upon import into Lightroom. Adobe’s AI Noise Reduction is extremely processor intensive and can take over a minute to perform on a single image, depending on your computer’s processing power. The Noise Reduction Pre-set is more or less instant on import and can be applied to all your photographs automatically without the need to render out a new DNG file. You can then apply Lightroom’s AI noise reduction on select images if required.

Demonstrable Visual Results: In case you are wondering why I have not dotted this long post with visual examples comparing various ISO’s pre and post-ISO specific noise pre-set, it is because the images, once converted to jpeg and resized for the web, are not representative of the RAW file results. Conversion to jpeg and downsizing to something suitable for the web has a very significant effect on the visual noise in an image. Downsizing removes visible noise and thus distorts the visual results significantly. However, I have included a copy of all the RAW files I photographed of the X-Rite Color Checker in the creation of these pre-sets from ISO 50 to ISO 409,600 so you can visually see the differences yourself. Just import the RAW files into Lightroom, apply the pre-sets and do a before/after comparison. You may need to zoom in to 200%, 400% or even 800% to see differences.

Conclusion: Creating these ISO-specific noise reduction pre-sets for the Canon EOS R1 was a worthwhile investment in time and energy. It has been very educational (although time-consuming), and It should considerably speed up any workflow for someone that is shooting with this camera as the pre-sets can be applied on import. As they are ISO specific, Lightroom will then apply them correctly to each different ISO file you import. Since significant time and effort went into optimising these pre-sets, you will not have to worry about whether you are setting your noise reduction optimally. Just make sure you expose optimally in the field, apply the pre-set on import into Lightroom, and you can then focus on processing your photograph. Just remember, you still need to apply an appropriate level of capture sharpening for your RAW file in addition to the ISO-specific sharpening that may be applied in the pre-set. Happy processing!

PURCHASE THE OPTIMISED CANON EOS R1 NOISE REDUCTION PRESETS

New Camera Day – Arrival of the Canon EOS R1 Camera November 2024

Posted in Workshops and ExpeditionsLeave a comment

It felt like this day would never come, but finally, the embargo on the sale of the hotly anticipated Canon EOS R1 flagship camera has been lifted, and this morning at 9am, I took delivery of two Canon EOS R1 cameras. My initial information (which came from Canon) that the camera would not arrive until the 18th of November was incorrect, and Canon Australia did, in fact, deliver the cameras on the 14th of November in line with the USA release date embargo. Of course, like any new camera, there is a lot to set up and a lot to learn. Thankfully, the camera is similar to my much-loved EOS R3, so I hope it does not take too long to develop new muscle memory for the camera controls. I hope to squeeze in a podcast on my initial impressions before I leave for Antarctica and the Emperor Penguins in just six days.

The Problem of Flying with Camera Gear Update November 2024

Posted in Workshops and ExpeditionsLeave a comment

In September of 2021, I wrote a rather lengthy blog post HERE on the problems of flying with camera equipment. Given this post was now more than four years ago, it is time to do an update and see what, if anything, has changed. Much of this post is a re-hash, but its just as releveant today as it was four years ago when I first penned it. Before I dive into the details, it is worth examining the problem and the available solutions for flying with camera gear. I have been flying with camera gear internationally for decades, and over the years, I have learned a few things about what works and what doesn’t. Some history is needed to put all of this in context, and as such, this will be a bit of a long post, so bear with me as there is a lot to cover and discuss. If you have struggled with international travel and camera gear, then I hope this will be of interest to you.

Anyone who travels internationally (or domestically) with camera gear knows that one of the big problems is packing all your equipment safely for travel and being ready to go when you reach your destination. It is a thorny problem, and there has never been a great solution. There are countless YouTube videos on this issue. To date, none of them, to my mind, solve the problem in an elegant fashion that provides the user with an optimal travel and destination solution. The problem is you must compromise on the airport travel segment or the destination – it is almost impossible to pack for both in one bag.

Camera Backpacks: The problem with backpacks as a travel solution is they are heavy when laden with camera gear, and schlepping them through airports becomes a real chore. Especially when you are running late and have to run to the gate. If you fly once a year, this might not be too much of an issue for you, but if you are a regular traveller and travel with long lenses, you will already appreciate that backpacks are not ideal for navigating airports. Anything large enough to accommodate all the equipment is usually too big for carry-on (and too heavy). I long ago abandoned backpacks as a method for transporting camera gear through airports. They might be fine if you carry a small, lightweight mirrorless system with a few wide-angle lenses, but they are a real pain with bigger cameras and large telephoto lenses. They are also a real annoyance whenever you need to use a bathroom (there is never anywhere to put them off the floor) or go through security. In hot airports, they become uncomfortable on the long walk to the gate. I love backpacks on location, as they are undoubtedly the best way to move equipment around in the field, but not for destination transiting.

I own around half a dozen camera backpacks that include the original Gura Gear Kiboko and several different models of the Gura Gear Bataflae. I also own a few different-sized F-stop camera backpacks, a Lowe Pro Trekker for my 600mm, and two different Mr. Jan Gear backpacks. Each serves a different need and purpose; depending on where I am travelling and what I need to take with me, I vary the bag I carry. For safari-style workshops, where you need something with easy access that you can store on the seat of the game vehicle, the Mr. Jan Gear or Gura Gear bags are hands down the best thing since sliced bread. Their design means you can easily accommodate a lot of equipment on the seat of the safari vehicle next to you, and you don’t even lose any space because of their genius side-opening flaps. The bags are super light (made of super-strong lightweight sailcloth), and there isn’t much to dislike outside of the price tag. They are the best thing on the market for their intended purpose.

For hiking, the inbuilt frame of the F-Stop backpacks makes them the ideal choice. They are comfortable for extended periods of walking or hiking and have the best harness system I have yet tried in a dedicated camera backpack. They also have an innovative access system that allows you to access all of your gear without diving into the top of the bag and pulling everything out to get to something at the bottom. There are numerous sizes to choose from and several different brands on the market; ultimately, all do the same thing in one form or another. Again, there isn’t much to dislike outside of their ridiculous price. Speaking of which, why is it that the moment a bag is labelled a camera bag, its price seems to triple? Some of F-Stops backpacks are now closing in on $1,000 USD. That is just ludicrous for a backpack in my opinion.

The other problem with all backpacks is that they are soft, and cameras and lenses can be easily damaged inside them as you move around airports and planes. If you have ever watched someone shoehorn their carry-on suitcase into the overhead and crush your camera bag, then you know exactly what I mean. I’ve watched airline staff stuff so much into an overhead that everything gets crushed. I am always acutely aware of and always try to pack the overhead in such a way as to protect my bag. It is one of those travel stresses I could do without. Soft backpacks are fine on location when you need to move around, but they are sub-optimal at best in airports.

RollerBags: Roller bags are probably the best way to transport camera gear through airports and have been my go-to solution for many years. With wheels and the ability to roll, the bag’s weight becomes far less of a concern. The problem with roller bags is that they are typically quite heavy, even when empty, and of course, they are not very practical when you are on location and ready to shoot. My solution has always been to pack a backpack as part of my checked luggage and then re-pack the gear from the roller into the backpack at the other end. It’s not an elegant solution, as it almost always requires two checked bags (one to accommodate the camera backpack). If you are willing to travel with two checked bags, it’s a reasonable solution, and it has served me well for many years. Although I admit I am tired of manhandling two large checked duffel bags through international airports. So much so that I went looking for a new solution. I will come to this shortly.

I own half a dozen roller bags and have a love/hate relationship with them. Probably the best one is the Lightroom F-Stop Roller (sadly discontinued for many years now). It combines a hard/soft roller with a hard bottom and sides and a soft top. It has a place for a laptop, and it holds a ton of gear for its size. It is also the lightest roller for its size by a good margin. Sadly, it has been discontinued for many years, and no replacement exists. My Lightroom Roller has been around the world more times than I can count, and it is close to being on its last legs (honestly, it’s kaput). The bearings in one of the wheels are finished, and the handle is starting to come apart. It has served me well, and has been put out to pasture and retired. In my opinion, F-Stop messed up when they discontinued this bag. I know several people who own them who, like me, lament this bag being no longer available.

I also own several other roller bags, including the expensive and somewhat flawed Think Tank Airport V.3. This is, quite honestly, the purchase I regret the most. For a soft-sided roller, this bag is heavy (around 5kg), even when empty, and takes a paltry amount of equipment because of its flawed interior design. Within ten minutes of trying to pack this bag, I recognized that I had made an error in judgment with its purchase. The only trip it ever did with me was on its way home from the New York photo expo, and I cursed it the entire way home. Since then, I have moved it on, and it no longer takes up space in my cupboard. While its features sound good on paper, they do not translate well for travel. I wish Think Tank had consulted with photographers who travel extensively before they designed this bag.

The other problem with roller bags is that most of them are soft, and the equipment inside is subject to damage, just like if inside a backpack. The hard-sided roller bags on the market go some way to alleviating this problem but usually do so at the expense of added weight. Most hard-sided rollers are also traditionally made of cheap plastics that tend to crack and split very quickly. I have tried several non-photography hard-sided rollers, and they never last more than 12 months before they either crack, split or otherwise fall apart. The F-stop Lightroom roller was a hybrid bag with a tough hard bottom and sides that worked well. It doesn’t offer the same level of protection as a Pelican, but it was a reasonable compromise. To date, I have not heard of a dedicated camera roller bag that has hard sides all around outside of those like Pelican and SKB. And those fall into a very different category of camera bag.

Pelican Cases: Pelican cases are the safest way to travel with your camera gear (provided you can carry it onto the plane). They are indestructible, waterproof, and can be configured in various ways. The problem with Pelican cases is that if you check them (and your gear), you are challenging the baggage handlers to do their utmost (and they will try) to destroy it. Baggage handlers seem to believe that Pelican cases are designed to be thrown and mishandled because the contents are well protected. While they are unlikely to do anything but cosmetic damage to the outside, they will cause a lot of shock to the internal cameras and lenses. Lenses with Image Stabilisation, such as big telephoto lenses, are particularly susceptible to shock damage because of their floating elements, and as such, I would never recommend checking a Pelican full of big lenses. Checking the case also opens you up to the possibility of lost luggage and theft.

Pelican makes a light carry-on version called the Pelican AIR 1535, which is a roller that can hold quite a bit of equipment with its TrekPack system. However, it still leaves the problem of needing to re-pack at the destination if shooting out of a Pelican isn’t possible for your trip. Shooting out of a Pelican case might be fine for a studio photographer, but if you are working out in the landscape or from a ship, it is not usually ideal. The other problem with the Pelican AIR1535 is that it is more than a fraction too small inside for a 600mm f4L IS Lens because of the design of the interior lid foam. Even with their TrekPack system, it’s a very tight fit (uncomfortably so, in my view). The problem is the foam inside the lid costs you roughly an inch of height and has to be severely compressed to accommodate a 600mm lens. When I test-packed this case, I realised I was just too uncomfortable with how much of a squeeze it was to accommodate the 600mm lens, and I returned it. It is an exceptionally well-designed case, is light for what it is, and, had it been half an inch more accommodating in-depth, would probably be my current solution.

My Ongoing Solution: Some four years ago, I became aware that Think Tank (makers of the awful Airport V.3 roller) had partnered with an American company called SKB Cases to try and solve the problem of flying with camera gear both in the airport and on location. Their answer is the i-Series of cases (yes, they really should have come up with a more imaginative name). If, like me, you have never heard of SKB, then you are not alone. Long story short, they make hard, tough cases just like Pelican and like Pelican, SKB is also manufactured in the United States. The net result of this partnership between Think Tank and SKB is a pretty cool solution that goes some way to solving the airport and field dilemma.

In brief, SKB has manufactured a tough pelican-style roller case that meets airline carry-on restrictions in conjunction with Think Tank and provides a dedicated insert that can be lifted out and used as a backpack or carry bag on location. When you order the case, you stipulate how you want the interior configured – either as a backpack, a carry case, or a case with a lid organizer. The genius of this design is that you don’t need another backpack or bag at the other end (unless you are going to be hiking). Once you arrive at your destination, you open the case, lift out the insert, and away you go—simple, elegant, and relatively efficient.

I was somewhat dubious at first, but after a little online research, a couple of coffees, and some YouTube reviews, it became apparent that SKB’s cases are at least as good as Pelican and, in some ways, appear more carefully thought out and better engineered. Having directly compared the SKB to the Pelican Air 1535 I would say they are more alike than different. I would give a slight edge to the SKB for its improved clasps and to the Pelican for its stronger handles (more on this below). Given my experience with the Think Tank Airport V3, I was somewhat dubious, so I carefully measured my gear against the quoted internal dimensions and found it would all fit. So, I took a punt and ordered the Roller Case and carry insert option. I was going to make a short video on this, but Think Tank and SKB have done a decent enough job of it for you to get the idea.

I opted for the carry insert option and not the backpack or lid organizer option, as the carry bag offers just a bit more depth, which is required to house a 600mm f4 lens securely. If you don’t own a 600mm lens, you could use the backpack option. The SKB 3i-2011-7DZ (who comes up with these model numbers!) is an airline carry-on approved size, watertight and dustproof rolling hard case with a removable zippered divider interior designed by Think Tank.

Although the SKB roller is more or less identical to Pelican’s AIR1535 it has more internal depth because it does away with the thick foam in the lid. Instead, the top section is padded by the insert’s soft lid. If you are familiar with the F-Stops ICU system, this is a very similar approach. It works better than Pelicans TrekPack system as you gain nearly an inch in height. Although the TrekPack system is modular, it is a bit like pluck foam in that once you set it up, you are more or less stuck with the same configuration. I prefer velcro-style foam dividers, which can easily be reconfigured to suit changing gear.

It is essential to be clear that the SKB/Think Tank solution isn’t perfect. For starters, it doesn’t provide sufficient room to leave a camera mounted to the 600mm lens once on location. If you need to be able to leave a camera mounted to the 600mm lens, you have no option but to gate-check another backpack (like a Lowe Pro Trekker). 600mm lenses provide unique travel challenges that are hard to overcome, and one has to make compromises. Additionally, because of the hard and rigid sides, there is no room for ‘bulge’ and as such, the bag doesn’t hold quite as much as an F-Stop Lightroom Roller. But these things are a compromise and something has to give. In the end, I think it’s better to trade a little space for the security of a rigid Pelican-style case.

Another alternative I experimented with is ditching the internal dividers inside the lift-out carry bag and opting instead for cameras and lenses in camera and lens pouches. This option provides a lot more space than the internal soft carry case and dividers but requires a bit more care when packing. Of course, it adds cost as well as its necessary to purchase soft camera and lens cases from the likes of Lens Coat. It also kind of removes some of the elegance of the lift out solution. Swings and roundabouts…. After some experimentation, I ditched this solution as I was never comfortable with all the loose items in the case – despite them being in pouches.

One aspect of the SKB/Think Tank solution I like is the ability to quickly remove the padded insert from the case when it’s full of equipment. Suppose you are ever challenged at the airport to check the case because it has wheels or because the airline staff member dislikes you. In this situation, you can quickly lift out the padded insert, sling it over your shoulder with the included strap, check the empty hard case, and walk onto the plane with all your equipment. You can do this with F-stop backpacks as well, but it’s a bit more fiddly to get the internal insert out, in my experience, when it’s packed with gear.

This solution appears, on the surface, quite suitable for airport travel, as it offers a hard shell roller case that maximises the protection of the camera gear and lenses. It then provides a backpack or carry case once on location. How does it work in practice?

So Whats the Verdict? After more than four years of travelling through airports and well over two hundred international flights, I can tell you that the SKB solution works (for me). It is not perfect, and I have had several broken carry handles and have had to replace the rolling wheels – the latter being my fault for repeatedly dragging the case over rocky, uneven ground it was simply not designed to cope with. The broken handles are the result of a design flaw (although SKB claim I have overloaded the case?), whereby the plastic pin that holds the handle in place is inadequate once the case is fully loaded (it should be machined aluminium). Credit to SKB though for excellent customer service as they replaced the pins for me twice free of charge. They also replaced the wheels free or charge.

The SKB case has sucessfully protected all of my equipment over the last four years without incident. I can get 2 Canon EOS R3 bodies (or Canon EOS R1’s), a 600mm F4, a 14-35mm f4, a 70-200mm f2.5, a 24-105mm f4 and a couple of spare batteries in the case – thats plenty for most photography trips. It remains an easy way to navigate through airports and I still love the ability to remove the insert and sling it over my shoulder if I need to or am challenged by a grumpy airport official. In the field, I can take the insert out and put it into either a dry bag or repack the gear into a seperate backpack. Its not a perfect solution, but its as close as I have yet encountered for airport and field travel. If I plan to repack into a backpack then my preference is the Mr. Jan Gear Boris – it swallows a tone of gear and works well in the field.

Why not just use the Pelican 1535 Air? I would actually prefer to use the Pelican version if possible as its significantly lighter than the SKB case when both are empty. However, the Pelican 1535 is not as large internally and despite my best efforts will not swallow the same amount of equipment as the SKB. The loss in internal dimensions in the 1535 is significant and if you shoot large pro bodies (EOS R3 and EOS R1’s or Nikon Z9’s) like I do, you may well find they dont fit properly. I do like the TrekPak system offered by Pelican and if you shoot a smaller system from someone like Sony (or perhaps Canon EOS R5 cameras) you may find the 1535 Pelican sufficient for your needs.

Full Disclosure: I am not affiliated with Think Tank, SKB, Pelican or F-Stop camera bags. I used my hard-earned cash to purchase the SKB / Think tank solution and all the F-Stop camera bags. I have been and remain an unpaid ambassador for Mr. Jan Gear and Gura Gear camera bags and have several bags I have been supplied by them for review over the years. I paid for the original Kiboko and original Mr. Jan Gear Boris with my own money. I am actually not interested in free camera bags and have turned down several offers to be an ambassador for different brands in recent years.

Iceland South Western Landscape Extension Report October 2024

Posted in Workshops and ExpeditionsLeave a comment

In late September 2024, I ran a short 4-day photography workshop on the Snaefellsnes Peninsula on Iceland’s stunning southwest coast. This workshop was designed as an optional extension for participants from our Greenland East Coast Scoresby Sund Expedition (Read the Trip Report). It offered a more relaxed, leisurely pace, providing time to immerse ourselves in the unique geological beauty of the basalt coastline.

The Snaefellsnes Peninsula is often referred to as “Iceland in miniature” because it encapsulates many of the country’s varied landscapes—volcanic craters, jagged coastlines, waterfalls, and black sand beaches—all within a compact area. For photographers, it’s a treasure trove of textures, shapes, and dramatic contrasts, making it an ideal location for capturing grand vistas and intricate details. During our time on the peninsula, we visited several iconic coastal locations, including Arnastapi, Gatklettur, and Malarif, each offering something different for the keen photographer.

One of the key philosophies I encourage in these workshops is the importance of exploration by foot. The Snaefellsnes coastline is rugged and dramatic, with intricate basalt formations that beg to be photographed from multiple angles. Rather than just stopping at viewpoints or busy tourist spots, we took the time to walk along the shoreline with cameras ready, searching for compositions that capture the essence of the place. The basalt formations in this region offer endless opportunities for wide-angle photography and more intimate detail work. The sharp geometric lines of the basalt columns contrast beautifully with the often turbulent seas, creating the perfect scene for long-exposure photography. At the same time, the interplay of water against rock creates opportunities for capturing more abstract and fine art compositions.

• Arnastapi: Known for its dramatic cliffs and the famous basalt rock arch, Gatklettur, this location provided breathtaking seascapes and fascinating rock formations. It’s a photographer’s playground, with each step revealing new textures and compositions.

• Gatklettur: The natural arch is a centrepiece for any visit to this region, and we spent time here exploring the surrounding coastline, capturing the sweeping views and focusing on the arch as the subject in long exposures.

• Malarif: Located near the iconic lighthouse of the same name, Malarif offers expansive views of the coastline and was one of the highlights of our explorations. Here, the waves crashing against the basalt cliffs created perfect conditions for dynamic coastal photography.

We parked at various locations around the peninsula and then explored the surrounding areas on foot, both early in the morning and late in the afternoon. We photographed during the “golden hour” and stayed on location well into the sunset, capturing the changing light as it played off the landscape.

Iceland’s weather is notoriously unpredictable, and the initial forecast for the workshop was not promising—heavy rain and overcast skies were expected. However, the Icelandic gods smiled upon us, and we were instead treated to several days of ideal photographic conditions. Overcast skies created soft, diffused lighting, perfect for landscape photography. This gentle light minimized harsh contrasts and allowed us to capture the fine details in the basalt rock and surrounding landscapes.

One of the unexpected highlights of the trip was our visit to the Hraunfossar waterfalls, a series of waterfalls that cascade out of a lava field into the Hvítá River. To our delight, we arrived just as the autumn colours were at their peak. The contrast between the vibrant reds, oranges, and yellows of the foliage against the cool blues of the water and the dark lava rock was spectacular, creating scenes that were a photographer’s dream.

The Hraunfossar waterfalls are easily accessible by a nearby walking path, which allowed us to explore different vantage points and compositions without rushing. This location was a wonderful opportunity to slow down and appreciate the subtle beauty of the Icelandic landscape in autumn.

As our four days ended, we returned to Keflavik, where we concluded the workshop with outbound flights. It was a short but highly productive trip, filled with the moments that make Iceland a true haven for photographers. Each day offered something unique and memorable, from the striking basalt coastline to the vibrant fall colours. This workshop was about capturing beautiful images and fostering a deeper connection with the landscape. Walking the coastline, breathing in the crisp autumn air, and experiencing Iceland’s natural wonders up close was as rewarding as the photographs we took home.

For those looking to explore Iceland in the future, the Snaefellsnes Peninsula offers an unparalleled combination of beauty, variety, and solitude, even in well-known spots. With the right approach—tripod and camera in hand, ready to explore—you’ll find endless opportunities to create photographs that tell the story of this incredible part of the world. We will likely be offering a further Iceland landscape workshop in the future. Please contact us to register your interest.

WNPP Episode 104 – Canon EOS R5 Mk2 Musings from the Arctic

Posted in UncategorizedLeave a comment

I have just published episode 104 of my Wild Nature Photography Podcast. In this episode, I discuss my thoughts on the new Canon EOS R5 MK2 camera now that I have had an opportunity to use the camera in the Arctic for several weeks of intense photography (Eastern Greenland and South Western Iceland). I first tested the camera back in September in Australia over three days of landscape photography down the Great Ocean Road. During this shoot, I was photographing only from a tripod and had not yet shot handheld with the camera in my preferred polar environment. My initial impressions from this shoot in Australia were all positive, and I was very keen to get the camera up to Greenland to see how it performed. After shooting with the camera in Eastern Greenland and Iceland for the last three weeks, I have (perhaps surprisingly) concluded that this camera is not for me. The files are excellent at low to moderate ISO (ISO800 and below) but fall far short of those from the EOS R3 at ISO800 and above. Since most of my photography is at moderate to high ISO (typically 800 and above), this is a significant factor in my decision-making process. Of more importance, however, is that the ergonomics of the EOS R5MK2 just don’t suit my size hands or my style of shooting. It is a wonderful camera that will undoubtedly make many people happy – but it isn’t for me. Find out more in this podcast.