Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: P30+ back reports ?  (Read 8704 times)

william

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 472
P30+ back reports ?
« Reply #20 on: June 16, 2007, 09:27:38 pm »

My earlier reaction wasn't really directed at you.

Regardless, I'm now indoors with the lights dimmed and see a LOT more noise in that first shot I posted than I thought was there.  I am now going to post a second photograph of that same woman shot at ISO 400 and F2.8 (notice I said "woman" -- she's over 18).  Please note that this has been retouched; levels, healing brush, minimal skin smoothing.  Point of focus was on her left eye if you want to assess "sharpness" (which is obviously as much dependent on the lens and aperture as the back).

Can those of you reading this thread react to the "noise factor"?  I'm now thinking that either (1) I'm going blind or (2) I (or Capture One) screwed up the processing in the earlier (now removed) shot or (3) there's some sort of JPEG conversion or resizing artifacts going on.  

Looking at the PSD of this image on my screen in Photoshop, I see little noise.  (I do see noise, but not much).  But that's what I initially thought of the first  photo as well (granted, under different viewing conditions)....

Reactions?  (To the amount of noise.  I'm not posting this to have my photography critiqued.  Yes, I could always use critiques, but that's not the point of this post.  And yes, I realize the tiny flowers/weeds are cheesy. but she had them in her hand at the time)

Quote
Are U sure this is 400 iso and not 800 or accidently boosted a stop???? I am absolutely not impressed with what i see in this picture. It is about the same quality in noise and colornoise as was my Ixpress 384 before the upgrade to flexcolor 4.6 and now even that back is better than what i get to see here.
I think something went terrebly wrong with that image you posted  .
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=123173\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
« Last Edit: June 16, 2007, 09:31:50 pm by william »
Logged

rainer_v

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1194
    • http://www.tangential.de
P30+ back reports ?
« Reply #21 on: June 16, 2007, 09:42:52 pm »

Quote
Reactions?  (To the amount of noise.  I'm not posting this to have my photography critiqued.  Yes, I could always use critiques, but that's not the point of this post.  And yes, I realize the tiny flowers/weeds are cheesy. but she had them in her hand at the time)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=123219\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

i would like to see it at 100%. otherwise i cant say anythink.
Logged
rainer viertlböck
architecture photograp

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
P30+ back reports ?
« Reply #22 on: June 16, 2007, 10:11:20 pm »

William, be real - we can only evaluate the Raw file, retouched small versions are useless - email it to yourself with www.yousendit.com and then post or pm everyone who asks the link.

Edmund

Quote
My earlier reaction wasn't really directed at you.

Regardless, I'm now indoors with the lights dimmed and see a LOT more noise in that first shot I posted than I thought was there.  I am now going to post a second photograph of that same woman shot at ISO 400 and F2.8 (notice I said "woman" -- she's over 18).  Please note that this has been retouched; levels, healing brush, minimal skin smoothing.  Point of focus was on her left eye if you want to assess "sharpness" (which is obviously as much dependent on the lens and aperture as the back).

Can those of you reading this thread react to the "noise factor"?  I'm now thinking that either (1) I'm going blind or (2) I (or Capture One) screwed up the processing in the earlier (now removed) shot or (3) there's some sort of JPEG conversion or resizing artifacts going on. 

Looking at the PSD of this image on my screen in Photoshop, I see little noise.  (I do see noise, but not much).  But that's what I initially thought of the first  photo as well (granted, under different viewing conditions)....

Reactions?  (To the amount of noise.  I'm not posting this to have my photography critiqued.  Yes, I could always use critiques, but that's not the point of this post.  And yes, I realize the tiny flowers/weeds are cheesy. but she had them in her hand at the time)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=123219\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

william

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 472
P30+ back reports ?
« Reply #23 on: June 16, 2007, 10:41:09 pm »

Nah, never mind.  I'm not going thru that much effort.  

Quote
William, be real - we can only evaluate the Raw file, retouched small versions are useless - email it to yourself with www.yousendit.com and then post or pm everyone who asks the link.

Edmund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=123225\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
P30+ back reports ?
« Reply #24 on: June 16, 2007, 11:06:16 pm »

Quote
Nah, never mind.  I'm not going thru that much effort.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=123227\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Where's the effort ? It's less effort than posting here.

Edmund
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up