What's with all the digital noise?
How digital noise occurs - and how you can make it go away
In 2006, this was the reality of digital noise in photos ...
‘Bollocks, it’s dark out here’, you think, and scratch your head. ‘I’d better up the ISO a little bit, to ensure that I can use a decent shutter speed’. The downside of using a higher ISO, of course, is that you introduce digital noise. But where does this noise come from? Why does your image quality go down the pan as soon as you touch that ISO dial?
Read on to find out what it is, where it comes from, and what you can do about it!
A regular reader recently e-mailed me with essentially the above question – and it’s a good one: The inner workings of a digital camera are a little bit obscure to most of us. So, here is my imperfect and slightly simplified explanation of what ISO noise is, where it comes from, and what you can do to reduce it.
How does an imaging chip work?
Whether you use a CCD or a CMOS chip in your camera, the basic functioning of an imaging chip is pretty much the same: Imagine millions of tiny little light meters squashed into a tiny little chip the size of a postage stamp. How many million? Well that depends on the resolution of your camera, of course, but if you’ve bought yourself a Canon EOS 500D, you’ve got a 15.5 or so million pixels (of which 15.1 million are used), which are squished into a grid of 4,752 cells across and 3,168 cells tall. All of these pixels are somehow fitted on roughly 22mm by 16mm sized space – yes, that’s about the same area as the button on your average door-bell.
When you take a photograph, there are a set of shutter curtains which move aside – exposing the imaging chip for as little as one eight thousandth of a second – giving the sensor time to measure the light that falls on it. Then, the shutters close again, and the sensor sends the measurements to the camera’s cpu, which does some calculations, and then stores the whole thing as a digital file.
Where does ISO come into it?
Now you know pretty much how an imaging chip works – but where does ISO come into it? Well, all imaging chips operate at the lowest ISO your camera supports – usually ISO 100. In this mode, your camera takes its light measurements from its millions of tiny little light sensors, passes it directly to the brain of the camera, which then stores it.
When you crank up the ISO value to, say ISO 400, another step is added to the mix: Your camera still takes the same measurement, but in the CPU of the camera, the measured values are multiplied by 4, to get ISO 400. Or by 8 to get ISO 800. Or by 32 to get ISO 3200. Pretty straight-forward stuff, right?
So, er, Where does digital noise come from?

Silhouette in Concert by yours truly – Also see the full-resolution image for an excellent example of digital noise in photography
Well, think about it: while chips have gotten much, much better in recent years, it’s still a case of 15 million tiny little sensors doing their thing in a space the size of your thumb nail.
The problem is that – as with all precision measuring instruments – they can only be so precise: all of them introduce a degree of measuring inaccuracy. The problem with imaging chips is that they are internally inconsistent, and they are unpredictable.
The inconsistency is a problem which can largely be resolved: The camera can take a photograph, and realises that if one particular pixel always reads a little bit higher than its immediate brethren, it can calibrate so that one pixel is adjusted down to fit better. This calibration is done before the camera leaves the factory, and it’s trivial for camera manufacturers to built-in calibration checks on an ongoing basis – it’s relatively trivial to detect a dead pixel, for example, and then interpolate what its likely value would have been from its surrounding neighbours; and because there are 15 million of them, and we rarely check each individual pixel of a photograph, you’d never know.
The unpredictability issue is different, however; imaging chips are sensitive to temperature, and the act of taking a photograph actually causes the chips to warm up a tiny little bit (there’s a lot of electronics in a camera, after all, including the battery, the CPU, and all the circuitry to tie it all together – all of which generates various amounts of heat). Some cameras have a ‘noise reduction’ feature where they take another photograph immediately after you take a long-shutter-time photograph – but with the shutters closed. The theory is that it should be recording perfect darkness, but in practice it records a variety of readings from all the sensors. By subtracting these readings from the original image, you reduce (some of) the digital noise in an image.
Imaging chips are precise enough that at ISO 100, the differences in readings introduced by digital noise are practically unnoticeable. The problem comes from the multiplication process.
A thought experiment
Imagine you take a photograph of a perfectly gray wall at ISO 100, f/8.0 and 1/30 second exposure time. Three randomly selected pixels now read 100.5, 100 and 102. No problem; it looks great, and the stored values are within 2% of each other – the wall looks like a perfectly even, gorgeous gray wall.

Now, switch the camera settings ISO to 800, f/8.0 and 1/240 second. The final result – in a perfect world – should be precisely the same: We’ve reduced the shutter speed to 1/8 of the original exposure, but the camera will multiply the exposure by 8 because we’ve changed the ISO. The same pixels now read 12.6, 12.5 and 15.5: The margins of error are the same as above. The camera multiplies it all by 8, and stores 101, 100 and 120 to the memory card. Suddenly, there’s a 20% discrepancy between the 3 values, which becomes very clear in the final image: What you’re seeing here is digital noise.

Now, imagine the same effect at ISO 3200: the pixels read 3.5406, 3.1250 and 5.1875, which the camera multiplies back up to 113, 100 and 166 – a far shot off from the 100, 100, 100 you’d get with a perfect imaging chip.

In reality, the metering tolerances in an imaging chip aren’t that pronounced; but the point is that if you multiply any meter reading with 32 (or much more, depending on how your ISO settings on your camera will take you), you’re talking about pretty serious discrepancies, and some pretty serious noise in your final image.
How can I reduce digital noise in my pictures?
Use as low ISO as you can get away with; Often, it’s better to use a tripod and a remote release cable combined with a longer shutter speed and lower ISO, than trying to shoot free-hand at shorter shutter speeds and higher ISO.
Use shorter shutter speeds; If you can, use shorter shutter speeds – the metering discrepancies will still be there, but less pronounced.
Keep your camera’s insides cool; when you take a lot of photos, you’re introducing more camera noise. Also, if your camera has a ‘Live View’ mode, it sucks battery, and means that the camera’s electronics are constantly working hard – which causes heat, and introduces more noise.
Use noise-reduction software; There’s a few options out there by now, but I've been consistently impressed by the RAW processor built into Lightroom - the before-and-after pics at the top of this article, for example, were processed with Adobe Lightroom. Personally, I quite like a bit of noise in my photos – it makes them look more accessible and ‘real’, I feel – but that might just be me.

TL:DR;
A super-brief summary of all of the above, courtesy of Redditor IAmSparticles:
When you increase the ISO setting on a digital camera, you're increasing the gain and magnifying any faults in the data from the sensor. It's like turning up the volume on a radio station with really bad reception. You can hear the faint signal better, but the static gets louder, too.
The problem is worse on smaller sensor chips (pocket cameras and phone cameras) because all the pixel sensors are packed together in a tighter space, causing more heat buildup and interference between them, and therefore more errors in the output.
Do you enjoy a smattering of random photography links? Well, squire, I welcome thee to join me on Twitter - Follow @Photocritic
© Kamps Consulting Ltd. This article is licenced for use on Pixiq only. Please do not reproduce wholly or in part without a license. More info.
Can you fix the focus on a blurry photo after the fact?
The birth of Mirrorless Cameras
Choosing your first dSLR camera
New York City can be beautiful!
The Fujifilm Finepix X10, A Review
Choosing the Right Light Stand
Photojojo iPhone Telephoto Lens review — AudioCast
My week with Q
How To Become A Successful Photographer
"When the Wind Stopped" — poem with 4 photos
Tips for Textures
Butterflies in Motion
Cast aways - saving those photographic memories
One Man Show: My 25 Years With Digital Photography
Studio, Flash, & Available Light — Three Books Reviewed
Portrait styling: dangerous pairings
Adobe Photoshop CS6 Product Managers Interview Audiocast
A gift of flowers: unfold your senses
On Set of "Love & Robots" the Film
Ilford Galerie Gold Fibre Silk Inkjet Paper — Audiocast











Planning “National Geographic” style photo travel
Wilderness Travel 1 Rainforests – Essential Gear
Backlighting Basics
A Brief History Of Light & Photography: Part 3 of 3
A Brief History Of Light & Photography: Part 2 Of 3
What Moves You?
FIGURES IN MOTION: Decades of Evolving Personal Imagery in Photography, Part 7
Lomography Store, Austin, Texas — GALLERY
GALLERY — Up to $1,000 Reward for Cattle Rustlers
eyePhone: The eBook for iPhone Photographers
Taking your Portraiture Higher
Interview with Harold Davis — Closeup Maestro of Flowers & Water Drops
Interview with Steve Caplin — Photoshop Digital Artist, Commercial Illustrator, & Author
Easy technique to select, edit and sequence keywords for web
How much should you charge for a photograph?







































Comments
I don't know how effective using higher shutter speeds would be at reducing noise. To keep exposure constant, you would need to increase ISO (with constant aperture). At one point does more consistent metering outweigh the benefits of bumping up the ISO?
Thanks for the clear and simple way to visualize high ISO; I've passed this on to others.
You could increase the shutter speed by adding more light :)
Sure, but then you wouldn't need the higher ISO, right?
I like the bar-graph approach at the bottom. The way I'd phrase it is:
1) each photo-site is a bucket, and depending on the ISO, we say it'll take a given number of photons to fill it (equivalent to making it read "white")
2) sensor thermal noise is a linear random error lurking at the lower-value end (picture "±10")
3) as the ISO increases the ±10 stays the same but the number of photons required to saturate each photosite halves per stop, so the linear error constitutes a greater proportion - or, it intrudes more on the values used in the image.
You can picture #2 above as an area of fuzz at the bottom of each bar in your graph - a gradient of r/g/b fading out with higher values to say "here be noise".
Something else to consider: a bayer grid has more green photosites than red than blue - effectively, in SNR terms, the sensor has a different ISO sensitivity per channel; if you're making a digital black&white conversion, noise will show up in the blue then red channels first, so choose filters carefully (and in extreme cases, use real filters when shooting, instead).
BTW, another way to make it go away: image-stacking. If you take two images and average them, the noise starts to cancel-out; the SNR effective ISO halves with every doubling of the number of images stacked. So, say you have four images at ISO 800; simply by opening them in layers in Photoshop and setting the layers' transparencies to (100, 50, 33, 25)% (counting from the background up) and flattening it, you've got the noise-equivalent of a mere ISO 200 image instead.
Nicely explained. Not too long and easy to understand. I had a rough understanding of this, but you've clarified it well.
If I may add one thought on heat and exposure time. I'm not too sure I've ever noticed that much difference between comparing low light shots at speeds of 1/100 sec to 1/30 sec. At least not enough to be concerned about. But start getting into 1 second shutter speeds or bulb mode and you really start to introduce a lot of noise due the length of time that the sensor is powered, even at ISO 100. At least on my EOS 20D. I haven't tried bulb on my 7D yet but I don't really expect it to be all that much better. Heating up those little photo sites just doesn't do nice things to the final image.
Post new comment