why the noise

Here is a pic I sanped this afternoon of Kiley in the tub. I had the camera set on auto with no flash. My settings are

B&W with blue filter, toning +1, contrast -1, sharpness +1. It says it was shot at f4 at 1/8 ISO 640 so why is there

so much noise in the picture. the lighting was pretty good. 3, 60 watt bulbs in a room that is maybe 7x8 feet with

white tile walls. I will say that the ones I took with flash there was no noise in them.<div></div>

<p>The white walls lead to underexposure in auto mode which in return produces noise, especially at high ISO. Have a look at the histogram of the unprocessed file, what does it say? </p>

<p>I bet a spike on the right side Markus. You're right and this is very underexposed as you explained. Look at how much 'cleaner' the bright areas are.</p>

<p>I bet the area surrounding the subject was bright enough to call for some exposure comp adjustments. The large area of bright whites probably threw the metering off a notch.</p>

<p>UE, expose to the right.</p>

<p>Take a look at your histogram.</p>

<p>In these situations I use spot metering and lock the exposure on the subject's face. The camera is trying to expose for the bright white tiles, which it then attempts to make grey.</p>

<p>Know thy tools, Jordan.</p>

<p>Child surrounded by white, brightly reflective surfaces. Dark picture. I agree, spot metering is the way to go here. Which camera was used? Also, 1/8 sec with a live subject invites lack of sharp results. Some bounce flash and higher shutter speed would have been a good idea.</p>

<p>same theme - <br>

1/8th is way way too slow when humans are involved. I know we have IS.... but between you & a kid, especially, there's just way too much moving going on.<br>

You have to be smarter than the camera - realize that lots of white is going to fool the camera, so you have to out think it.<br>

And I'm pretty sure I see somebody casting a shadow onto the kiddo - gotta stay out of the way of your own light sources.<br>

I know 3 60watt bulbs would SEEM like enough light... just realize cameras like a whole lot more light than your eyes. Especially for really good results.</p>

<p>Tyler,<br /> <br /> Unlike transport jets which work pretty amazingly on autopilot, DSLRs loses a lot of their functional intelligence when set to Auto. They really work best with a knowledgeable operator.<br /> <br /> The camera is just going to give you an averaged out result that may have little to do with aesthetics, especially in a challenging shooting environment as you presented. The noise is a symptom of the camera being asked to do something unreasonable.<br /> <br /> You may have had three light bulbs on, but just looking at the shadowing of the boy it is apparent that the shooter blocked much of the light. Enough light was reflected off the white tile to skew the "average" metering result that the camera was going to use as the basis for decision making.<br /> <br /> Personally there was no way I would have even taken a shot at 1/8 of any toddler, but I understand that this was an intentional learning situation for you and that's smart and good.<br /> <br /> If you are intending to be serious about portrait photography I strongly recommend you purchase a used Sekonic light meter that measures both incidental and reflective lighting. Some of them also have remarkable spot metering capabilities, but you can also score a wonderful analog Pentax spotmeter for a fair cost. I know you are not into reading as a learning source, but I would recommend you use the meter and take notes on each exposure and how well the shot works. After a three months of steady use in common environments you get the metering piece down real good. Metering and lighting management are core skills of photographers and separate us from snapshooters.</p>

<p>ME</p>

<p>here is one I took with flash</p><div></div>

<p>I suspect a contributing factor is that you were using center-weighted metering which is less 'intelligent' about detecting backlit situations and boosting the subject exposure. The good thing about center-weighted is that while it may require more attention and intervention by the photographer it behaves more predictably than segmented/matrix metering.</p>

<p>This much white is usually going to require intervention in some form, segmented metering or otherwise. This is similar to shooting on a beach or in snow. One approach would be to meter Kiley's skin at +1EV, either by using spot or by moving the camera close in for metering and using 'M' or AE-L to lock in the exposure.</p>