I was recently asked to create a slide show for a photographer friend who shoots a lot of weddings. His images for this particular event, taken about a year ago, were the standard mix of wedding photos—ceremony, formals, reception—but were taken with several different digital cameras (he often uses an assistant to shoot, also). One of the cameras was a newer model, and another was probably three or four years old. I was, in a word, stunned at the difference in lower-light image quality produced by the two cameras, both of which were set to the same exposure. Notably, the older camera exhibited a tremendous amount of noise.

Cameras are designed to detect light, and much of the effort in digital image sensing technology development over the last five years has focused on improving low-light sensitivity with minimal amounts of digital noise. For example, the Canon 1D Mark III, with an ISO capability ranging to ISO6400, shows far less digital noise on images taken in low light at, say ISO 1000 than an earlier model of the 1D series or, for example, a Canon 10D. Nikon has made similar developments in its image sensors, over about the same time period (but I’m more hard-pressed to give you specifics, since I exclusively shoot Canon).

As a world/Olympic fencing photographer, I’m no stranger to low-light photography. While venues and events such as the Olympic Games or world championships are adequately illuminated while my subjects are competing under the multiple spotlights, there are still challenges—such as when fencers step-off the main strip for one reason or another and I have to quickly adapt to a vastly different exposure on-the-fly. Some photographers carry a flash for these situations, but often we’re all too far from the fencers (at least 20 – 30 feet, if not farther) for a flash to make much of a difference. Shooting events of any kind—from a wedding reception to an Olympic event—often give photographers the same challenges, especially when using a flash is prohibited or not useful.

In the right light, the subjects look well-illuminated against a darkened background. One step off the fencing strip, however, and the situation changes significantly.

My solution to these challenges is two-fold. The first is in managing my camera during the shoot and knowing what to do when a low-light situation inevitably occurs; the second is understanding the software tools and features available to optimize images after-the-fact. Let’s take a look at both.

Be Ready for Low Light. If you need to shoot quickly at an event of any kind, and the light changes for the worse (for example, what if you’re shooting with a flash, your batteries run out, and you don’t have more? What if you’re shooting an event where flashes aren’t allowed?), you need to know how your camera responds best in these conditions. Some cameras do better with a moderately increased ISO sensitivity (say from 640 to 1000), while others may still hold their own with a greatly increased ISO (say to 1600 or even 3200). Yes, no matter what camera you have, the digital noise increases with higher ISO; however, it’s far, far, more noticeable in some cameras than others – and you need to know where your camera fits in the range.

Depending upon the lens you’re using, you’ll of course want to shoot “fast” … meaning a wide aperture. I typically shoot f/2.8 “fast glass,” so I can open-up wide enough to buy some additional light. If you know you’ll be in low light and you can get within typical portrait ranges of people, you may want to consider even faster, prime lenses such as an f/1.4 or f/1.8, which allows you quite a bit more. I normally have to shoot subjects farther away, so f/2.8 is my fastest option.

Pro cameras have more ISO options, so you can play with these on-the-fly much faster. With the Canon 1D Mark III, I can see my ISO through the viewfinder and I can change it without taking my eye off my subject—which can be quite handy.

However, you’ll need to be cognizant of your depth-of-field changing in lower light with f/stop changes; for example, if two subjects are standing together, you’ll want to get them into the same plane (assuming you can!) so that you’re not shooting one in focus and the other “soft.” As you probably know, the wider the aperture the shorter the depth of field. So if you don’t have the luxury of getting them into the same plane and you want them both focused, and you have to shoot in low light, you’ll need to resort to making ISO adjustments to be able to retain a narrower aperture setting (and increased depth-of-field). Knowing how to do that quickly, and understanding your camera’s acceptable digital noise limits, are the keys to getting the shot.

Light changes quickly off the fencing strip — but sometimes a little darkness adds drama, such as this coach congratulating an athlete’s tears of victory. I still had to adjust my camera for the shot (from the main strip) and then do post-production editing in ACDSee Pro.

Low-Light Optimization After-the-Fact. You can make significant adjustments after-the-fact with ACDSee Pro to help your low-light image look better—and still minimize the noise. One thing you should know is that there is essentially an inverse ratio between digital noise and soft images – if you try to decrease the noise in an image (such as by using the “noise” feature in ACDSee Pro’s edit menu), it will often cost you a decrease in sharpness. So, while you can decrease noise to a degree by using this feature, if you want a crisp image you’re probably better off keeping some noise artifacts.

What I typically do is a combination of how I shoot images combined with some software tweaking. I will intentionally shoot with my settings on the darker side, with a bit faster shutter speed and lower ISO, so that I can keep a bit more depth-of-field and less noise. I’m not producing images that are very dark; rather, they’re just darker than you’d want them to be in a finished image. Shooting darker is often better than the opposite – simply because you can always take information out of a dark image, but putting it back in to one that’s overexposed is nearly impossible.

So I end up, sometimes, with a set of darker images that are, presumably, in need of adjustment in ACDSee Pro—which is where the “exposure” and “shadows/highlights” features are indispensible. In fact, I think the shadows/highlights feature in this product is one of the most useful tools available to photographers today in any software package, bar none. It’s simply a nearly magical tool that I literally use all the time. I’ve come to shoot images that are darker in many situations, knowing that I can process them later to bring out detail and illuminate my subjects just as if the image were shot that way.

Here are some tips for these features:

1. You’ll need to experiment with the Exposure feature to understand it. While an auto-exposure will often work and is frequently useful for a batch process, you may still need to adjust images using the levels or curves features. Additionally, the “fill light,” “contrast,” and “exposure” adjustments under the “exposure” setting (yes—it’s the exposure option under the exposure feature!) can provide some interesting detail (or not, if that’s what you want).
2. With the Shadows/Highlights adjustments, it’s especially important to understand that they affect the entire photo (so does exposure, but it’s even more critical here). That’s why I also often use the Selection tool to lasso the areas I really need to brighten in an image. For example, if I shoot a group of people and one or two of their faces are too dark, I will lasso them both and brighten them – when brightening the entire group would overexpose it. You can also lasso areas you want to significantly under- or over-expose, such as a part of an image you want to under-emphasize (such as a dark area behind illuminated subjects, or a bright area outside of a silhouette shot).
3. Batch processing, while handy, can produce unwanted results in some images. As a result, it’s important to batch images for which you have original backups so that you can ditch and individually edit a batch-processed shot that corrected poorly.
4. When you apply an auto-exposure individually or in a batch, you may want to choose not to also adjust the color settings (it’s an option). This way, you’re only having the software intelligently analyze and treat the contrast.
5. Don’t forget the “Z” …! Pushing your keyboard’s “Z” key will let you see the before/after effect of your change while you’re making adjustments in Shadows/Highlights or Exposure.
6. Why use Exposure versus Shadows/Highlights? Shadows and Highlights are more for complementary details (even if they’re primary features in a subject) in an image that increase the overall level of detail and brightness. Exposure is just what it says; it approximately adjusts the image as if you were changing your camera’s exposure settings. If you want to only bring out some detail or work on individual components of an image, usually Shadows/Highlights is your best choice first.
7. Sometimes you’ll adjust exposures and a few images will still have some areas that need to be brightened; in these cases, consider using Shadows/Highlights. It may work better to use it with the Selection tool.

I photographed this image of a ballerina at the St. Petersburg, Russia’s Hermitage Ballet while there for the 2007 World Fencing Championships; I was privileged to be allowed to take photos (without flash, of course) at this world-class venue (in some ways, a lot like shooting fencing!). I shot the image in RAW on the Canon 1D Mark IIn, with my settings at 1/200th second, f/2.8, and ISO 1250 using a Canon f/2.8 L-Series 24-70mm lens. The image produced was a bit too dark, so, after converting it to sepia (only because I wanted to), I did the following:

• Overall, I tried a scaled-down auto-exposure (with a reduced strength setting of about -35 on the slider). This also limits the sepia effect if it’s too pronounced.
• I used the Shadows/Highlights and Selection tools to bring out detail (brighten) in the ballerina’s dress.
• I used the same features, but this time using the “darken” slider, to reduce the detail in the background and floor because it was too obtrusive.

A Final Thought and Tip: There’s still a noticeable amount of noise in the ballet image, but especially since it’s rendered in a hybrid black-and-white/sepia tone, there’s no color to the noise, per se – which often is one of the least desirable noise effects of high-ISO, low-light digital images. So in the event that you’ve got too much noise and you still want to use the photo, see how it looks without color.