Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8]   Go Down

Author Topic: Why are the tests of IQ250 against CCD-backs taking so long?  (Read 35339 times)

Fine_Art

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1172
Re: Why are the tests of IQ250 against CCD-backs taking so long?
« Reply #140 on: February 11, 2014, 01:26:14 pm »

Hi,

If you check my posting you would note that I had noise reduction disabled. I wanted to investigate the noise in the sensor and not how it affects noise reduction.

The reasons for that were threefold:

1 - normally try to keep noise recuction low
2 - if you go into noise reduction there will be a an infinite number of possible combinations of options
3 - it is my belief that noise should be kept to minimum, an image with no or little noise is preferable to an image that depends on noise reduction

Best regards
Erik


Then the demosaicing is failing. People may stop noticing because they always seem to get blobs of magenta and cyan in their darks. It's time to reality check that. How many landscapes have blobs of magenta and cyan? It is clearly a product of the software.
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11288
    • Echophoto
Re: Why are the tests of IQ250 against CCD-backs taking so long?
« Reply #141 on: February 11, 2014, 01:35:04 pm »

Hi,

Let's put it this way, Capture One is even worse. If you know better post your own samples, please!

The images below are from Doug's test of the IQ250 vs the IQ 260, and processed in Capture One, with noise reduction set to zero and defaults.


Best regards
Erik

Then the demosaicing is failing. People may stop noticing because they always seem to get blobs of magenta and cyan in their darks. It's time to reality check that. How many landscapes have blobs of magenta and cyan? It is clearly a product of the software.
« Last Edit: February 11, 2014, 01:37:14 pm by ErikKaffehr »
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

Doug Peterson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4169
    • http://www.doug-peterson.com
Re: Why are the tests of IQ250 against CCD-backs taking so long?
« Reply #142 on: February 11, 2014, 01:44:11 pm »

The images below are from Doug's test of the IQ250 vs the IQ 260, and processed in Capture One, with noise reduction set to zero and defaults.

Notably the screen grabs of the IQ250 and IQ260 files Erik just posted are with a 4 stop push (as noted elsewhere).

Fine_Art

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1172
Re: Why are the tests of IQ250 against CCD-backs taking so long?
« Reply #143 on: February 11, 2014, 02:34:01 pm »

This is RT with noise reduction off. I uploaded this for people to see more natural color not for noise reduction which I never touched based on ISO 100 file.
I appreciate the enthusiasm of the original image; I found it a bit garish in color.

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2806/12463985743_f1c563964f_o.jpg

I don't see the point in a 4 stop push on an interior lit library. Taking the darkest parts of the scene to bright sunlit is just a software game. You would never do that with your real images.
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11288
    • Echophoto
Re: Why are the tests of IQ250 against CCD-backs taking so long?
« Reply #144 on: February 11, 2014, 02:47:50 pm »

Hi Doug,

It is pretty much my way of comparing DR. Expose for the highlights and see how much noise there is in the shadows. That is actually what DR is about.

That said, I very seldom feel limited by DR.

Best regards
Erik

Notably the screen grabs of the IQ250 and IQ260 files Erik just posted are with a 4 stop push (as noted elsewhere).
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

Fine_Art

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1172
Re: Why are the tests of IQ250 against CCD-backs taking so long?
« Reply #145 on: February 11, 2014, 02:55:45 pm »

Hi Doug,

It is pretty much my way of comparing DR. Expose for the highlights and see how much noise there is in the shadows. That is actually what DR is about.

That said, I very seldom feel limited by DR.

Best regards
Erik


Ok, now I understand what you are doing.

Here is the same area cropped that you selected. I just turned on NR 30, Red channel 30. Impulse NR on. Nothing fancy, something anyone would try as a starting position.

Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11288
    • Echophoto
Re: Why are the tests of IQ250 against CCD-backs taking so long?
« Reply #146 on: February 11, 2014, 05:10:55 pm »

Hi,

Which image and what converter?

Best regards
Erik

Ok, now I understand what you are doing.

Here is the same area cropped that you selected. I just turned on NR 30, Red channel 30. Impulse NR on. Nothing fancy, something anyone would try as a starting position.


Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

Fine_Art

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1172
Re: Why are the tests of IQ250 against CCD-backs taking so long?
« Reply #147 on: February 11, 2014, 05:35:47 pm »

That is the 0 shift, 0 rise IQ250 shot. The conversion is RT. 4.0.11.79
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11288
    • Echophoto
Re: Why are the tests of IQ250 against CCD-backs taking so long?
« Reply #148 on: February 11, 2014, 05:41:56 pm »

Thanks a lot!

Erik

That is the 0 shift, 0 rise IQ250 shot. The conversion is RT. 4.0.11.79
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

Fine_Art

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1172
Re: Why are the tests of IQ250 against CCD-backs taking so long?
« Reply #149 on: February 12, 2014, 12:26:05 am »

Any other conversions? I would like to see a more neutral C1 interpretation.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8]   Go Up