Reading mode: Light Dark

another photo (noise)...

Go to last post
CSR,
Good job.
Jennie,
Have you checked the replies to your other thread.
People really are trying to help you here.
Don
 
It still looks like some type of artifacting to me. Noise is usually a colored grain, like in Jim's photo on the last thread, and is completely random. This is more geometric. (Look at it at 200% and you can really see the geometric nature.)

Just to clearify. When you wrote:
Jennie said:
I didn't do a thing to it
orginal size
Click to expand...
am I to take it that this is a crop at 100% from the original? If so then the problem would be in the camera settings, i.e., change the sharpening to soft and use raw or tiff.

If you downsized the picture, the artifacts are from your software. Make sure you always save at the highest resolution. If this is the case, I am not saying there is no noise in the original picture, but most of the noise would be averaged out when downsampled. The noise (or artifacts) you see would be added by the software.

If the image came out of the camera at this size, then there is something else wrong:)
 
Don, I haven't had a chance to check since 5... my time. Had to pick up my daughter from daycare, will go there now- thanks, Jennie
Don Christolear said:
CSR,
Good job.
Jennie,
Have you checked the replies to your other thread.
People really are trying to help you here.
Don
Click to expand...
--Murph
 
Yes, this is the orginal size
Jennie
TrentMcD said:
Just to clearify. When you wrote:
Jennie said:
I didn't do a thing to it
orginal size
Click to expand...
am I to take it that this is a crop at 100% from the original? If
so then the problem would be in the camera settings, i.e., change
the sharpening to soft and use raw or tiff.

If you downsized the picture, the artifacts are from your software.
Make sure you always save at the highest resolution. If this is
the case, I am not saying there is no noise in the original
picture, but most of the noise would be averaged out when
downsampled. The noise (or artifacts) you see would be added by
the software.

If the image came out of the camera at this size, then there is
something else wrong:)
Click to expand...
--Murph
 
Jeannie

Looks noisy to me as well. I have found with my E-10 (following advise posted throughout this forum) that the contrast and sharpening settings are best set to low (especially if I plan to post edit/process). I use PS 6.0. The E-10 manual suggests low settings as well (pages 106, 107). You should also set camera resolution 2240 x 1680 and compression 2.7 or use TIFF. Best of luck.
Mike
 
Jennie said:
I didn't do a thing to it
orginal size
SHQ- F8 shutter 125
2 studio strobes w/umbrellas

Let me know what you think
when I ZOOM into this photo i find it to be very pixeled.... and
noisey

Jennie
http://www.babycakesphotography.net

http://www.pbase.com/image/1095758/medium.jpg
--
Murph
Click to expand...
Here is the link to the full size image Jennie posted:

http://www.pbase.com/image/1095758/original

Jennie -- was this also shot with your camera sharpness set on hard? My guess would be yes. I've never gotten skin texture like that using either normal or soft sharpening.

--Joe-TN http://www.pbase.com/joe_tn/shared_photos
 
I have my camera set on SHQ mode.

If i set any higher i can't take pictures w/out my buffer being full fast. Thats ANOTHER problem with the oly.

Jennie
Wbeeriam said:
Jeannie
Looks noisy to me as well. I have found with my E-10 (following
advise posted throughout this forum) that the contrast and
sharpening settings are best set to low (especially if I plan to
post edit/process). I use PS 6.0. The E-10 manual suggests low
settings as well (pages 106, 107). You should also set camera
resolution 2240 x 1680 and compression 2.7 or use TIFF. Best of
luck.
Mike
Click to expand...
--Murph
 
Yes Joe, I realized it was set on sharp, my mistake. Would that cause the noise?
Jennie
Joe-TN said:
Jennie said:
I didn't do a thing to it
orginal size
SHQ- F8 shutter 125
2 studio strobes w/umbrellas

Let me know what you think
when I ZOOM into this photo i find it to be very pixeled.... and
noisey

Jennie
http://www.babycakesphotography.net

http://www.pbase.com/image/1095758/medium.jpg
--
Murph
Click to expand...
Here is the link to the full size image Jennie posted:

http://www.pbase.com/image/1095758/original

Jennie -- was this also shot with your camera sharpness set on
hard? My guess would be yes. I've never gotten skin texture like
that using either normal or soft sharpening.

--
Joe-TN

http://www.pbase.com/joe_tn/shared_photos
Click to expand...
--Murph
 
Jennie

My apologies for spelling your name incorrectly my last post to you. Each of the E-10 quality settings (SHQ, HQ, SQ) can be set to personal preference. You may have changed SHQ to be less than highest resolution and with higher compression rate than the default settings. Each quality designation is only a reference for the user, the resolution and compression ratio are adjustable. I suggest you check SHQ settings to see if they are what you want.
Mike
 
I've seen on the back where you can adjust it. I've changed it and pressed okay. for some reason when I go back & check the setting it's back on the default tif one. Am i doing SOMETHING wrong? Jennie
Wbeeriam said:
Jennie
My apologies for spelling your name incorrectly my last post to
you. Each of the E-10 quality settings (SHQ, HQ, SQ) can be set to
personal preference. You may have changed SHQ to be less than
highest resolution and with higher compression rate than the
default settings. Each quality designation is only a reference for
the user, the resolution and compression ratio are adjustable. I
suggest you check SHQ settings to see if they are what you want.
Mike
Click to expand...
--Murph
 
Sorry for the confusion, I wasn't looking at the right picture. (I don't know if you were confused, but I was!) After downloading the original (thanks Joe-TN) I've looked at it closely. O.K., now I see the noise. And yes, most of it is noise, not artifacting. This is a little more than I usually get. To reduce the noise I am getting I've been shooting only in raw. a bit of a pain, but worth it. Besides that, I can't really help you.

Oh well, sorry about that. I'll go back to your first thread and look make sure I was looking at the correct picture.
Jennie said:
TrentMcD said:
Just to clearify. When you wrote:
Jennie said:
I didn't do a thing to it
orginal size
Click to expand...
am I to take it that this is a crop at 100% from the original? If
so then the problem would be in the camera settings, i.e., change
the sharpening to soft and use raw or tiff.

If you downsized the picture, the artifacts are from your software.
Make sure you always save at the highest resolution. If this is
the case, I am not saying there is no noise in the original
picture, but most of the noise would be averaged out when
downsampled. The noise (or artifacts) you see would be added by
the software.

If the image came out of the camera at this size, then there is
something else wrong:)
Click to expand...
--
Murph
Click to expand...
 
Jennie:
I think that if you set your camera back to normal you will see a difference.

The reason I think this is because one day I was have trouble, the photos just didn't look good and they had noise. Then I realized that I set the camera on hard contrast and when I would sharpen them in a program that I use to print they would have a lot of noise. When I set the camera back to normal then I could add more shapness with out noise.

I hope that this will help
Gaylon Janes
Jennie said:
Joe-TN said:
Jennie said:
I didn't do a thing to it
orginal size
SHQ- F8 shutter 125
2 studio strobes w/umbrellas

Let me know what you think
when I ZOOM into this photo i find it to be very pixeled.... and
noisey

Jennie
http://www.babycakesphotography.net

http://www.pbase.com/image/1095758/medium.jpg
--
Murph
Click to expand...
Here is the link to the full size image Jennie posted:

http://www.pbase.com/image/1095758/original

Jennie -- was this also shot with your camera sharpness set on
hard? My guess would be yes. I've never gotten skin texture like
that using either normal or soft sharpening.

--
Joe-TN

http://www.pbase.com/joe_tn/shared_photos
Click to expand...
--
Murph
Click to expand...
 
Jennie said:
I've seen on the back where you can adjust it. I've changed it and
pressed okay. for some reason when I go back & check the setting
it's back on the default tif one. Am i doing SOMETHING wrong?
Jennie
Click to expand...
Jennie

When you first open the menu and scroll down to the resolution settings, TIFF shows by default. Use the arrow pad to the right over the TIFF panel. Scroll down once to the SHQ panel. Move over to the right to the resolution panel and scroll up or down untill the 2240 x 1680 setting shows if it is not there already. Move to the right again over the compression panel. Scroll up or down untill the 2.7 option appears. Press OK and then press OK again to exit the settings menu. Check the resolution setting is SHQ in the control panel and you are all set. I hope that helps.
Mike
 
I haven't noticed a big difference in write times between modes, except for tiff. The E-10 always writes the whole raw file to the buffer and then does the conversion to jpg (or tiff) before writting to the card. On the one hand, raw has an advantage since it doesn't have to convert to another format. On the other hand, the raw files are large, so they'll take longer. The tiff files are VERY large and will take almost twice as long to save as raw. I don't see any reason to use tiff since raw is better quality and faster. I think if you got used to working with raw, you'd never go back.
Jennie said:
Jennie
Wbeeriam said:
Jeannie
Looks noisy to me as well. I have found with my E-10 (following
advise posted throughout this forum) that the contrast and
sharpening settings are best set to low (especially if I plan to
post edit/process). I use PS 6.0. The E-10 manual suggests low
settings as well (pages 106, 107). You should also set camera
resolution 2240 x 1680 and compression 2.7 or use TIFF. Best of
luck.
Mike
Click to expand...
--
Murph
Click to expand...
 
Jennie said:
Yes Joe, I realized it was set on sharp, my mistake. Would that
cause the noise?
Jennie
Click to expand...
I don't know that it would cause noise, but it would make whatever noise is in the system worse in the file. Or, in manual speak, "selecting HARD could cause the image to appear rough".

You should probably get better results than this if you just set the camera back to its defaults and worked from there; then try changing one thing at a time and see what happens.

Someone else here mentioned compression settings. Tiff will be Tiff -- you can't change that. The Jpeg settings can be set pretty much to your liking, and generally the less the compression you choose for a given resolution the less you will see any imaging system faults amplified by in camera processing.

--Joe-TN http://www.pbase.com/joe_tn/shared_photos
 
Thats Ok

this is the right photo, better then the other. For some reason the lighting is off on the other one- looks better in this one

Anyway, I can try it on RAW mode, but the buffer getting full fast will be a pain..
Jennie
TrentMcD said:
Oh well, sorry about that. I'll go back to your first thread and
look make sure I was looking at the correct picture.
Jennie said:
TrentMcD said:
Just to clearify. When you wrote:
Jennie said:
I didn't do a thing to it
orginal size
Click to expand...
am I to take it that this is a crop at 100% from the original? If
so then the problem would be in the camera settings, i.e., change
the sharpening to soft and use raw or tiff.

If you downsized the picture, the artifacts are from your software.
Make sure you always save at the highest resolution. If this is
the case, I am not saying there is no noise in the original
picture, but most of the noise would be averaged out when
downsampled. The noise (or artifacts) you see would be added by
the software.

If the image came out of the camera at this size, then there is
something else wrong:)
Click to expand...
--
Murph
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--Murph
 
Okay, I'll try it
which would it be on the screen?
Jennie
TrentMcD said:
Jennie said:
Jennie
Wbeeriam said:
Jeannie
Looks noisy to me as well. I have found with my E-10 (following
advise posted throughout this forum) that the contrast and
sharpening settings are best set to low (especially if I plan to
post edit/process). I use PS 6.0. The E-10 manual suggests low
settings as well (pages 106, 107). You should also set camera
resolution 2240 x 1680 and compression 2.7 or use TIFF. Best of
luck.
Mike
Click to expand...
--
Murph
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--Murph
 
Ive done this-
but my question is.. when I go back & check it ... it says Tif. Is that normal?

Jennie
Wbeeriam said:
Jennie said:
I've seen on the back where you can adjust it. I've changed it and
pressed okay. for some reason when I go back & check the setting
it's back on the default tif one. Am i doing SOMETHING wrong?
Jennie
Click to expand...
Jennie
When you first open the menu and scroll down to the resolution
settings, TIFF shows by default. Use the arrow pad to the right
over the TIFF panel. Scroll down once to the SHQ panel. Move over
to the right to the resolution panel and scroll up or down untill
the 2240 x 1680 setting shows if it is not there already. Move to
the right again over the compression panel. Scroll up or down
untill the 2.7 option appears. Press OK and then press OK again to
exit the settings menu. Check the resolution setting is SHQ in the
control panel and you are all set. I hope that helps.
Mike
Click to expand...
--Murph
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top