What's wrong with the Quattro

Started 5 months ago | Discussions thread
RitterRunkel
Regular MemberPosts: 142Gear list
Like?
Re: Another one who can't read
In reply to mroy, 5 months ago

mroy wrote:

maple wrote:

Agree with Kendall. Nothing's wrong with Q's, just different.

P has finer details with smoother tonal transition. M has greater micro contrast that makes distant subjects look being closer, thus more vivid, though not necessarily natural.

It seems that both images could benefit from finer sharpening. 1 pixel at 100% seems a lot, for Q and M. But I'm no expert in pp.

That's what I'm thinking as well. But it's difficult to see anything here, since one has to compare images after USM with 1px @ 100% ... Both images are pretty f*cked up due to PP and not worth close consideration.

No pp in the first image apart from USM, as mentioned in my post. Minimal pp in the second pic, including USM.
F****d up??

USM = pp. Don't know what the images look to your eyes (maybe you have a screen with a very very high pixel density?), but to me your USM is way too heavy - especially with X3 images. I wouldn't even USM most of my Bayer images that heavily. Obviously you like accentuated pixel textures. But USM rather destroys the real detail to show more artefacts / halos due to USM. This may look like even more detail afterwards, but it's not.

 RitterRunkel's gear list:RitterRunkel's gear list
Sigma DP1 Sigma DP2x Sigma DP1 Merrill Sigma DP3 Merrill Sigma SD14
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow