7D processed and Pattern Noise Banding

Started Feb 28, 2010 | Discussions
Bleguk Banget
Regular MemberPosts: 179
Like?
7D processed and Pattern Noise Banding
Feb 28, 2010

I cancelled my plan to buy 5DII because I just read about banding at low Iso on 5D mark II. Not able to buy 1DsIII, turned to 7D (plan B).

I tried to post process any 7D Raw file on the net, including the one from Dpreview, a Raw from the 7D reviews.

Original:

You can download the original raw file from Dpr here:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos7d/page14.asp

The original photo contained a fair amount of highlights and shadows. This is a common situation everywhere anytime, where bracketing is not possible because a lot of moving things.

Post-processed 1 result (you can download the original file (large) from my Dpr Gallery):

Crop 1:

Then I tried different post-process with minimum tweak. Only on ACR adding a little shadows brightness and then lowering the contrast in photoshop.

Post-processed 2 result :

Crop 2:

In term of dynamic range, the original photo is showing common dynamic range condition expected to be found in real life. The camera should be able to capture it just like that and be processed to get better overall picture. Nothing is extreme or out of proportion in this process.

I think I come into a conclusion. 7D is a great camera as well as 5D Mark II.
But the ability to be post-processed is very limited.

In term of purchase plan, I am going to plan C now

Brian D. Schneider
Forum ProPosts: 16,675
Like?
Re: 7D processed and Pattern Noise Banding
In reply to Bleguk Banget, Feb 28, 2010

Bleguk Banget wrote:

I cancelled my plan to buy 5DII because I just read about banding at low Iso on 5D mark II. Not able to buy 1DsIII, turned to 7D (plan B).

I tried to post process any 7D Raw file on the net, including the one from Dpreview, a Raw from the 7D reviews.

Original:

You can download the original raw file from Dpr here:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos7d/page14.asp

The original photo contained a fair amount of highlights and shadows. This is a common situation everywhere anytime, where bracketing is not possible because a lot of moving things.

Post-processed 1 result (you can download the original file (large) from my Dpr Gallery):

Crop 1:

Then I tried different post-process with minimum tweak. Only on ACR adding a little shadows brightness and then lowering the contrast in photoshop.

Thats a pretty extream shadow push, you made it look like a bad HDR. In real world photos you would never have to push that much. This is a very unrealistic example of what 7d can do.
Try is again using a moderate amount of shadow/highlight.
--
Brian Schneider

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Karl Gnter Wnsch
Forum ProPosts: 10,868Gear list
Like?
Re: 7D processed and Pattern Noise Banding
In reply to Bleguk Banget, Feb 28, 2010

Bleguk Banget wrote:

In term of dynamic range, the original photo is showing common dynamic range condition expected to be found in real life. The camera should be able to capture it just like that and be processed to get better overall picture. Nothing is extreme or out of proportion in this process.

You absolutely overcooked your processing, it looks like a HDR nightmare.

I think I come into a conclusion. 7D is a great camera as well as 5D Mark II.
But the ability to be post-processed is very limited.

No, you have absolutely unrealistic expectations of what you can do to a picture. The original picture looks perfectly OK, the results of your processing to say it bluntly suck.

In term of purchase plan, I am going to plan C now

And what may that be? There is no camera in existence which would be delivering RAW files that can stand your completely over the top kind of processing.

-- hide signature --

regards
Karl Günter Wünsch

 Karl Gnter Wnsch's gear list:Karl Gnter Wnsch's gear list
Canon EOS 7D Mark II
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Canonstu
Junior MemberPosts: 43
Like?
Re: 7D processed and Pattern Noise Banding
In reply to Brian D. Schneider, Feb 28, 2010

As said earlier by the last poster i think you are expecting the camera to work miracles for you, you have pushed it to the point of looking terrible anyway. In the real world this would print out ok with no banding visible to the eye. Why do people look to the extremes of a camera instead of being happy with the capabilities which on the 7d are actually amazing. My actual thought now is plan c will not make you happy either but good luck with it.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
papparazzi
Senior MemberPosts: 1,937Gear list
Like?
Re: 7D processed and Pattern Noise Banding
In reply to Karl Gnter Wnsch, Mar 1, 2010

Karl Gnter Wnsch wrote:

Bleguk Banget wrote:

In term of dynamic range, the original photo is showing common dynamic range condition expected to be found in real life. The camera should be able to capture it just like that and be processed to get better overall picture. Nothing is extreme or out of proportion in this process.

You absolutely overcooked your processing, it looks like a HDR nightmare.

I think I come into a conclusion. 7D is a great camera as well as 5D Mark II.
But the ability to be post-processed is very limited.

No, you have absolutely unrealistic expectations of what you can do to a picture. The original picture looks perfectly OK, the results of your processing to say it bluntly suck.

In term of purchase plan, I am going to plan C now

And what may that be? There is no camera in existence which would be delivering RAW files that can stand your completely over the top kind of processing.

-- hide signature --

regards
Karl Günter Wünsch

He must be speaking Nikon... BUT as stated you did your homework very badly...extreme shadow recovery like that, what are you expecting?

-- hide signature --
 papparazzi's gear list:papparazzi's gear list
Nikon D600
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
birdbrain
Senior MemberPosts: 3,336Gear list
Like?
Re: 7D processed and Pattern Noise Banding
In reply to Bleguk Banget, Mar 1, 2010

I think a bit of common sense might help here. There is only so much dynamic range you can have in one photo. This is as true now as when we were exposing silver halides to light. I think with this photo you have just hit the buffers with a bit of a bang! But hey if you think there is a camera out there that can capture as massive a contrast ratio as in that photo then go and buy it quick.

 birdbrain's gear list:birdbrain's gear list
Sony RX100 II Canon EOS 6D Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM +15 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
MisterPootieCat
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,027Gear list
Like?
Let us know how "Plan C" works out for you
In reply to Bleguk Banget, Mar 1, 2010

Can we assume you don't actually own the 7D?

And as others have already commented: your PP skills could use some work.

 MisterPootieCat's gear list:MisterPootieCat's gear list
Canon PowerShot S2 IS Canon PowerShot S5 IS Canon PowerShot G10 Minolta DiMAGE Z1 Konica Minolta DiMAGE Z2 +18 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jackrsl
New MemberPosts: 7
Like?
Re: 7D processed and Pattern Noise Banding
In reply to Karl Gnter Wnsch, Mar 1, 2010

Have you tried processing that particular example yourself with ACR/Lightroom? Because it shows the banding with correctly calibrated monitor without any pushing or shadow lifting let alone doing some of those. This is a prime example of the much discussed low ISO banding problem plaguing pretty much every 7D to some extent (and yes, I have personally seen this in two cameras). Canon's DPP gets rid of most of the banding giving much cleaner results and some room for exposure adjustments, but in many cases it leaves at least traces of the banding visible.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Esbutt
Regular MemberPosts: 457Gear list
Like?
Trust...
In reply to Bleguk Banget, Mar 1, 2010

...people to come on here and tell you that you are not supposed to push the files that much!

Ain't it funny, the onus is on you to restrict yourself, not on Canon to get rid of the garbage in their files. The mind boggles....

-- hide signature --
 Esbutt's gear list:Esbutt's gear list
Canon EOS 7D Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Karl Gnter Wnsch
Forum ProPosts: 10,868Gear list
Like?
Re: Trust...
In reply to Esbutt, Mar 1, 2010

Esbutt wrote:

Ain't it funny, the onus is on you to restrict yourself, not on Canon to get rid of the garbage in their files. The mind boggles....

All DSLR will produce similar or worse when pushed over the edge by this kind of completely over the top processing.
--
regards
Karl Günter Wünsch

 Karl Gnter Wnsch's gear list:Karl Gnter Wnsch's gear list
Canon EOS 7D Mark II
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
FZ20_Alff
Regular MemberPosts: 105
Like?
Re: 7D processed and Pattern Noise Banding
In reply to Bleguk Banget, Mar 1, 2010

I personally think it's the way you are processing the photo. I can't say I'm an expert in post processing. However, I just used the same photo and ran it through DxO Optics. My results did not have any banding issues and it looks a lot better than what you were showing in the photo.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Julio
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,886
Like?
It's mostly the raw converter
In reply to Bleguk Banget, Mar 1, 2010

Like others have said, you're using a fairly extreme shadow push, but, imho, you're also seeing some problems unique to ACR/LR. Despite the fact that ACR 2.6 does a better job on 7D files than 2.5, it's still a much noisier conversion than what other converters can do.

Try the other ones like DPP, DxO, Bibble, etc. and you'll get different results. Most of them have 30 day free trials.

As a matter of fact the Auto Lighting Optimizer (ALO) that can be used by the 7D for JPGs is also part of DPP where you can apply it to raw files. It's not a bad tool at all for bringing up the shadows. I can guarantee you you'll get cleaner results there.

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
HotspurJr
Contributing MemberPosts: 878
Like?
Count me among those ...
In reply to Bleguk Banget, Mar 1, 2010

... who are baffled by the fact that you're surprised by this.

The car is 3-4 stops underexposed, at least. You're in the very foot of the shadow detail. There isn't a camera on the market which will get you clean detail when you're that unexposed. It just doesn't happen.

It's not the camera's fault. If you want the car clean, you've got to expose for it.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Sal Baker
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,830Gear list
Like?
Re: 7D processed and Pattern Noise Banding
In reply to Bleguk Banget, Mar 1, 2010

When you try to turn an underexposed black car in the shade, into a light-gray car, funny stuff is going to happen.

Sal

 Sal Baker's gear list:Sal Baker's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 350D Fujifilm X-E2 Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Noogy
Senior MemberPosts: 1,477Gear list
Like?
Bad exposure in the first place...
In reply to Canonstu, Mar 1, 2010

Agree with comments that you cannot expect any camera to capture a badly exposed photo then leave it up to your post-processing prowess to make it work or look good. I have similar shots and post-processing, I make sure that the dark areas of the photos do not go a night-to-day transition. At most I try to up shadows by a factor of 15-20, anything more than that looks awful by my taste. I follow up with gamma adjustment if there is enough light to spread across the image, careful that I do not again exceed the factor of 10-20 (or 110-120 on Corel). This is the primary reason I use Corel, because it is not as powerful as Photoshop, and therefore forces me to rely less on post-processing.

Canon RAW pics, even from my 400D, have more than enough headroom for wrong colors, wrong white balance, under-exposed images, etc. to be improved dramatically. But it does not profess any latitude to make a black ocean look blue, just as it is not supposed to be a savior of bad photographs, or for that matter, wanting photographers like I am - so I try not to remember that whenever I have my eye on the viewfinder and my finger on the shutter.

-- hide signature --

Noogy
'Photography is my therapy.'
Canon EOS 400D, Canon EOS 7D

EF 17-40 f/4L, EF 50mm f/1.8, EF 28-135mm IS, EF 38-76mm, EF-S 10-22mm, EF-S 18-55mm IS, EF-S 55-250mm IS

 Noogy's gear list:Noogy's gear list
Canon EOS 7D Sony Alpha NEX-5 Canon EOS 6D Canon EOS 100D Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM +9 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Brit
Contributing MemberPosts: 986
Like?
How did you do it (see DPP +2stop version) ????
In reply to Bleguk Banget, Mar 1, 2010

I don't know how you managed it - I downloaded the same raw file - processed it in DPP and increased the exposure the maximum DPP allows for RAW (a full 2 stops) - even set sharpening to "3" and didn't get the banding you did.
Below is the 100% crop from DPP with exposure incrased by 2-stops :

You only added "a little shadows brightness and then lowering the contrast" - and your results look much, much worse than the version above with the exposure increased a lot ...???

Strange

Bleguk Banget wrote:

Crop 1:

Then I tried different post-process with minimum tweak. Only on ACR adding a little shadows brightness and then lowering the contrast in photoshop.

Crop 2:

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ovlov
Senior MemberPosts: 1,214
Like?
Re: 7D processed and Pattern Noise Banding
In reply to FZ20_Alff, Mar 1, 2010

I had actually run that same photo through DxO (my raw converter of choice) and didn't see any banding. I might go back and look harder after this post but I didn't see any obvious flaws in image quality when I first pushed the file in DxO.
--
My flickr page
http://www.flickr.com/photos/33412421@N08/

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
John Sheehy
Forum ProPosts: 16,239
Like?
Re: Count me among those ...
In reply to HotspurJr, Mar 1, 2010

HotspurJr wrote:

... who are baffled by the fact that you're surprised by this.

The car is 3-4 stops underexposed, at least. You're in the very foot of the shadow detail. There isn't a camera on the market which will get you clean detail when you're that unexposed. It just doesn't happen.

It's not the camera's fault. If you want the car clean, you've got to expose for it.

It is the camera's fault. The camera should not have vertical streaks; its shadow usability should be limited by only fine, random noise, which is the only inevitable noise. Canon is very sloppy with their shadows, especially at low ISOs. They boast and brag about "improved dynamic range" with every new camera release, but they are lying, as every new camera seems to bring on new, non-random shadow noises at the DR ISOs (the low ones).

-- hide signature --

John

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
John Sheehy
Forum ProPosts: 16,239
Like?
Re: 7D processed and Pattern Noise Banding
In reply to Sal Baker, Mar 2, 2010

Sal Baker wrote:

When you try to turn an underexposed black car in the shade, into a light-gray car, funny stuff is going to happen.

Yes, when the design specs are garbage, like Canon's.

Doesn't happen with most other MFRs; doesn't happen with my G9, or my XTi.

Stop defending these capital-sucking vampires; it's pathetic.

-- hide signature --

John

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
John Sheehy
Forum ProPosts: 16,239
Like?
Re: 7D processed and Pattern Noise Banding
In reply to Brian D. Schneider, Mar 2, 2010

Brian D. Schneider wrote:

Thats a pretty extream shadow push, you made it look like a bad HDR. In real world photos you would never have to push that much. This is a very unrealistic example of what 7d can do.
Try is again using a moderate amount of shadow/highlight.

Actually, there are many cheaper cameras that will do this much better.

To expect better from a US $1700 DSLR is not in the least bit unreasonable.

-- hide signature --

John

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads