-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
What is banding
- Thread starter pigpig
- Start date
celltech161
Senior Member
This is something you have to ask Canon and Nikon folks. Us KM people have heard of no such things.
--
----------------------------
This space unintentionally left blank.
digitalshooter
Forum Pro
--
Thanks,
Digitalshooter!
Thanks,
Digitalshooter!
The D200 has awful lines that appear at areas of hig contrast - light to dark transitions and such - and Nikon likes to call it 'blooming'. You can search for pictures, they're pretty noticeable on the right shots.
But what do I know, I shoot Pentax.
But what do I know, I shoot Pentax.
brettania
Veteran Member
--
brettania
brettania
psn
Leading Member
That's not quite true. Someone asked about "image streaking" at high ISO a few months ago... do a search in this forum if you want to more info. I have seen this myself and could really be annoying.
Cheers!
-Perry
Cheers!
-Perry
Banding is basically when a color transition that's supposed to be smooth is not smooth, you see "steps" due to precision limitations.
for more info and some image example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colour_banding
for more info and some image example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colour_banding
kiklop_2
Veteran Member
There are plenty of sample images in nikon forum so i guess, each image can explain it better than i can
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=16622193
Difficult to say what is causing this (can be both the hardware and software) with d200 but i beleive Nikon will fix this if is a real issue.
This isn't a normal behaviour and it isn't present with 7D or 5D (or with any perfect working digital camera)
--
http://www.dyxum.com - KM DSLR dedicated website
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=16622193
Difficult to say what is causing this (can be both the hardware and software) with d200 but i beleive Nikon will fix this if is a real issue.
This isn't a normal behaviour and it isn't present with 7D or 5D (or with any perfect working digital camera)
--
http://www.dyxum.com - KM DSLR dedicated website
The poster quoted below is talking about a different kind of banding! 
What i understand is happening is at certain frequencies, they demosaicing algorithms are somehow* incorrectly interpreting color information, effectively overlaying data in a pattern. (the image has to be reconstructed from RGGB, yes two green, pixels to form one image color value)
At it's most "simple", it could be just Bayer information overlay.
I shoot a D2X, so am quite removed from the issue, though for obvious reasons, have followed the debate more closely than most KMSLRT regulars.
Bottom line, if this isn't a manufacturing error with some sony sensors, or support circuits, it will be firmware fixable.
The 7D as others have mentioned, has never been affected by similar issues, but it's far from the first report of banding in a camera. IIRC the D1X has a similar, firmware fixed, problem at high ISO. That's just off the top of my head.
Don't worry either that the CCD in the D200 will affect future KM cams - it's highly unlikely that the exact same CCD will be used, and more to the point, won't be used in the same way by KM (different supporting circuitry).
You have to bear in mind 1) it's not a universal problem 1b) but it's a showstopper if you require big prints or up-res for an agency 2) the D200 is the mass market high end personified - production runs this big have not been a feature at this level of camera in the past, so some QA issues were almost inevitable 3) everyone is a little hysterical over the D200 as of now, right down to someone blaming the banding thing for loss of a potential sale on what was truly an unsaleable picture, banding notwithstanding. Ken Rockwell just got Google slot #1 as an indirect result, if you search for "D200". 4) like back / front focus reports, gripes take center stage in the complainer vs. fanboy stakes with any new popular camera, whether people own one or not 5) if it does appear to be a prevalent issue, Nikon maybe just snatched disaster from an almost unmissable market victory.
If it continues to be an issue, i expect every second post about any new dslr shipped this year to mention how "model y" doesn't band like the D200.
One other reason it's so contentious, is that Nikon effectively said "as good as a D2X but a third the price" in their specs. That's a siren call to enthusiasts and a great hope / promise. I have my own reasons i would not swap a D2X for a D200, nothing to do with banding, but i admit i was briefly tempted to trade "down".
If you ask me, the problem is simply that there's so many units backordered, that users experiencing banding just can't demand an exchange camera.
You know, it was always my hope that KM would pull off a cam like the D200 (better, actually, of course!) and i thought KM had lost their chance. Maybe KM don't need to market their way out of a wet paper bag, if this is a for - real problem for Nikon.
Hope my explanation of some use, if only as a summary of the controversy.
cheers!
====================================
Proof, it it ever were needed, that Mr. Rockwell is not a Brit
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
'This may be a blessing in disguise for fast-shooting fudge packers, since you'll start having the D200 lock up on you before you're really full, and it will free up again for another few shots.' [ http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d200/d200-high-speed.htm]
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
What i understand is happening is at certain frequencies, they demosaicing algorithms are somehow* incorrectly interpreting color information, effectively overlaying data in a pattern. (the image has to be reconstructed from RGGB, yes two green, pixels to form one image color value)
- i make no pretense at full understanding, my flu - sodden brain is creaking a bit recently.
At it's most "simple", it could be just Bayer information overlay.
I shoot a D2X, so am quite removed from the issue, though for obvious reasons, have followed the debate more closely than most KMSLRT regulars.
Bottom line, if this isn't a manufacturing error with some sony sensors, or support circuits, it will be firmware fixable.
The 7D as others have mentioned, has never been affected by similar issues, but it's far from the first report of banding in a camera. IIRC the D1X has a similar, firmware fixed, problem at high ISO. That's just off the top of my head.
Don't worry either that the CCD in the D200 will affect future KM cams - it's highly unlikely that the exact same CCD will be used, and more to the point, won't be used in the same way by KM (different supporting circuitry).
You have to bear in mind 1) it's not a universal problem 1b) but it's a showstopper if you require big prints or up-res for an agency 2) the D200 is the mass market high end personified - production runs this big have not been a feature at this level of camera in the past, so some QA issues were almost inevitable 3) everyone is a little hysterical over the D200 as of now, right down to someone blaming the banding thing for loss of a potential sale on what was truly an unsaleable picture, banding notwithstanding. Ken Rockwell just got Google slot #1 as an indirect result, if you search for "D200". 4) like back / front focus reports, gripes take center stage in the complainer vs. fanboy stakes with any new popular camera, whether people own one or not 5) if it does appear to be a prevalent issue, Nikon maybe just snatched disaster from an almost unmissable market victory.
If it continues to be an issue, i expect every second post about any new dslr shipped this year to mention how "model y" doesn't band like the D200.
One other reason it's so contentious, is that Nikon effectively said "as good as a D2X but a third the price" in their specs. That's a siren call to enthusiasts and a great hope / promise. I have my own reasons i would not swap a D2X for a D200, nothing to do with banding, but i admit i was briefly tempted to trade "down".
If you ask me, the problem is simply that there's so many units backordered, that users experiencing banding just can't demand an exchange camera.
You know, it was always my hope that KM would pull off a cam like the D200 (better, actually, of course!) and i thought KM had lost their chance. Maybe KM don't need to market their way out of a wet paper bag, if this is a for - real problem for Nikon.
Hope my explanation of some use, if only as a summary of the controversy.
cheers!
- kirbs
--
====================================
Proof, it it ever were needed, that Mr. Rockwell is not a Brit
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
'This may be a blessing in disguise for fast-shooting fudge packers, since you'll start having the D200 lock up on you before you're really full, and it will free up again for another few shots.' [ http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d200/d200-high-speed.htm]
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
One of the reasons the 7D disappointed me was i felt it was not holding highlight detail at long exposure in high contrast scenes (typically night sky - scapes). I genuinely believe that long exposure night shots look smeared, and have yet to see a 7D image that was anything close to a Nikon, let alone a Canon 1 series, which i think are best in that range.
But that's not "banding" as experienced by the D200 boys . . .
The explanation is, I'm sure, well written somewhere above, but from what I've read on the Nikon forum it's not a major issue. All the images I've seen (so far, I may be wrong on this) have had banding appear only when they've been terribly overexposed (something like +5EV). I don't think this happens if you shoot properly under any circumstances, including nightshots. For Nikon's sake, I hope this doesn't boil over into some nonsense where people won't buy the D200 because it has something called "banding" that they've read about at dpreview, but don't know what it is, and have never actually seen it in real life... Sort of like 7D and backfocusing issues. I have yet to see a backfocusing 7D, so far it's either been motion blur, or people not understanding how AF works. Not that there wasn't a BF issue in some cameras, but certainly not on the scale this forum made it look like...
Not that there wasn't a BF issue in some cameras, but certainly not on the scale this forum made it look like...Legacys_Quest7
Senior Member
Uneven/unsmooth transition of highlights that is seen in prints. The banding is seen in the white or bright areas/highlights. It resembles a rainbow pattern but without the multicolors. It is something that is a common issue. Myth, banding is not a dslr handicap. film cameras have the banding issue as bad as dslr. why? this normally happens when there is alot of light being used. Example of common banding that is hard to get around. Studio lights. Tungsten lights put out alot very bright light. the control of tungsten studio lights are so bright, that even when you get a correct exposure you will have banding in your prints.
the lack of a smooth transition when printing. This could also be due to a lack of dynamic range of colors found in some printers. Epson which is the best out there suffers from this. It's not always a camera problem but a light source and limitation of the printers color range problems. one way to get around it is to go into adobe photoshop p.p.
KM 7d is one of those cameras that I have never seen the banding problems. I shoot in the studio at school with my 7d all the time and never experience banding when I print.
another term that you may see is called bronzing. bronzing is uneven smooth black in the shadows. the blacks doesn't look naturally black. it has a dark bronzing look that you can see in the prints.
the lack of a smooth transition when printing. This could also be due to a lack of dynamic range of colors found in some printers. Epson which is the best out there suffers from this. It's not always a camera problem but a light source and limitation of the printers color range problems. one way to get around it is to go into adobe photoshop p.p.
KM 7d is one of those cameras that I have never seen the banding problems. I shoot in the studio at school with my 7d all the time and never experience banding when I print.
another term that you may see is called bronzing. bronzing is uneven smooth black in the shadows. the blacks doesn't look naturally black. it has a dark bronzing look that you can see in the prints.
That someone was me - and it was at ISO above 200.
The problem was rectified by KM UK service throwing the camera in the bin and giving me a new one (well, a bit dramatic but it was a fault with the sensor - they tried to fix it and it didn't work)
It was very different from the examples on the nikon forum - mine was very very horrid and very very obvious (if I ever worked out how to post an image I'd happily stick one on here - I can always email one if you are interested)
As such, I'd agree that it isn't a banding issue with the 7D as such, just that I had a faulty CCD. To say that no 7D has ever produced images with very bad banding on would be a lie though....although it does seem with the d200 it isn't that it is an individual faulty camera but a fault with the design/software/etc across the board.
R.
The problem was rectified by KM UK service throwing the camera in the bin and giving me a new one (well, a bit dramatic but it was a fault with the sensor - they tried to fix it and it didn't work)
It was very different from the examples on the nikon forum - mine was very very horrid and very very obvious (if I ever worked out how to post an image I'd happily stick one on here - I can always email one if you are interested)
As such, I'd agree that it isn't a banding issue with the 7D as such, just that I had a faulty CCD. To say that no 7D has ever produced images with very bad banding on would be a lie though....although it does seem with the d200 it isn't that it is an individual faulty camera but a fault with the design/software/etc across the board.
R.
Hi,
or for deliberate push - pull noise control, which also strains the data, potentially in similar ways to those "banding tests" currently discussed.
well, excepting wide brackets for HDR tone mapping. Unless of course Nikon suddenly fixed the whole highlight exposure game, which i rather doubt
or for deliberate push - pull noise control, which also strains the data, potentially in similar ways to those "banding tests" currently discussed.
Well i think getting cold feet from all the reports is a natural response. I mean we all know how great images from the discontinued Kodak SLRs could be, but they sure bombed in the general market. Okay, the comparison is unfair. If ever you seek awesome post pro analysis and correction of a difficult to tame sensor, browse the c. 2003 KodakSLRT archives.
yes, on the understanding. AF. Focus > lock > recompose being the biggest bugbear there.Sort of like 7D and
backfocusing issues. I have yet to see a backfocusing 7D, so far
it's either been motion blur, or people not understanding how AF
works.
Far too many cameras are not properly aligned out of the factory. Fixable. Of interest are reports that the Nikon 17-55mm had in some circumstances BF/FF fixed by firmware upgrade. Focussing on mine sure got a lot better & faster.
- kirbs
Thanks, Terry!
Hi there!
nitpicking:
Have you considered too that this result you mention stems from the fact that tungsten lamps emit a very narrow spectra that doesn't reflect human perception (and so reflected is not necessarily "smooth" reative to gray) and can put your meter reading way off? You may simply be burning your highlights at the shoulder of the film curve, where color response is very non - linear. See the tech data for whatever film you're using.
And as you are likely only viewing sRGB and not a color space comparable to what Epson Prem Semi delivers out fo the box, how do you know it's a limitation, unless you have a ICC profile inspector / editor (and n.b. profiles misused can also introduce nasty gamut clipping, a very common **** up).
Have you taken a spectro to your prints, not just for straight chart input? Or wondered whether you're not exceeding the DRange capability fo the printer? i.e. did you contrast mask?
How also do you correct for lost or discarded spectra in PS?
Confused. Never had such problems. Never seen them in professional print. But I have screwed up in haste plenty in my time
cheers!
nitpicking:
that's the other banding
Erm, okay, studio hot lamps are brighter than the sun?
Have you considered too that this result you mention stems from the fact that tungsten lamps emit a very narrow spectra that doesn't reflect human perception (and so reflected is not necessarily "smooth" reative to gray) and can put your meter reading way off? You may simply be burning your highlights at the shoulder of the film curve, where color response is very non - linear. See the tech data for whatever film you're using.
Epson versus a Durst or Lambda? Or if only for inkjets, versus a Roland?
And as you are likely only viewing sRGB and not a color space comparable to what Epson Prem Semi delivers out fo the box, how do you know it's a limitation, unless you have a ICC profile inspector / editor (and n.b. profiles misused can also introduce nasty gamut clipping, a very common **** up).
Have you taken a spectro to your prints, not just for straight chart input? Or wondered whether you're not exceeding the DRange capability fo the printer? i.e. did you contrast mask?
How also do you correct for lost or discarded spectra in PS?
Confused. Never had such problems. Never seen them in professional print. But I have screwed up in haste plenty in my time
Some gloss papers are far more resistant to bronzing. Try the Fuji papers on your Epson if you haven't, they're pretty good. Supplied profiles are also pretty good (2200). The next term on the list might be metamarism, but the original question was about what the Nikon boys are calling banding, which a couple of people here are explaining as tonal truncation, and so going off at a tangent.
cheers!
- kirbs
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum