Reading mode: Light Dark

Major Disappointment with Fuji and S2

Go to last post
Rinus,

I've read many of your posts and you always seem fair and objective, so I read this thread with some interest. As one who sits on a fence ( S2 versus D60 ) it is interesting to see the issues on each as they arise. The D60 issues are mostly with the body, not the CMOS sensor. The S2 apparently has the opposite if it does show any problems. I have just become aware of this noise issue and will need to read more on the Canon forum to see if it exists on the D60 as well. I own a little bit of Canon gear ( 3 lenses and a flash ) but not enough to keep me into Canon. Still, if I cannot find overwhelming reasons to go the Nikon system route ( via S2 ) then I will obviously stay in Canon world due to slight cost savings.

The question I have on this issue is simply how noticeable is the problem? I do not tend to scrutinize every picture I take for digital artifacts and usually feel composition and color tend to capture a person's eye more so than sharpness and little flaws. I think most of us on here have more demanding eyes than do the general population. If one needs to look hard to see this problem then I can easily live with it as my composition will be more the limiting factor
Rinus said:
I believe that the trcak noise in my camera is a MAJOR issue. I do
not mean to say that it is an issue for most but I for one intend
to use film/digital for its announced capabilities. If I have to
let go of a good dynamic range because the algoriths do not live up
to their promised specs, I am not the one with the problem, Fuji
is. It proves that there is an issue with ordinary use of this
CCD/processor combination that sells under the Fuji name. I am sure
they know that this noise patterning is happening and I am also
sure they will deny it because admitting would cause a flood of
otherwise happy people returning perfectly normal operating cameras
for modification.
I am keeping a good score of all this because there may be an
ultimate solution to stop this noise in a newer version of EX
software which should be available as a free update.
I do not agree with Thom's assesment that the camera is performing
as it should and that it is to be expected. I do not believe for
one moment that he believes that himself but than again. I do not
test cameras and write books. Dynamic range is what digital is all
about just like dynamic range was the major force behind film
developement. The only people that had no problem were the few that
worked in well controlled and limited conditions and exposed
accordingly. That is hardly a situation for the masses. Even Ansel
Adams prooved that dynamic range was the key to his success.
As for people comparing cameras and being biased, that is just fine
with me beacause as long as people talk, problems like these are
discovered in the best systems and it gives me great knowledge of
other systems that I normally not even care to investigate on my
own. Largely due to the fact that I have heavely invested in the
Nikon company. I should really be allowed to vote in their stock
holders meeting.
Rinus of Calgary
Click to expand...
 
You address this whole issue very well. It was to stress the main issue - ultimate image quality - that I entered this thread. Up until this point the S2 was presented as the perfect DSLR - perfect body, perfect images out-of-the-camera, etc. I am simply pointing out that, unfortunately, that is not the case.

I never said the D60 is perfect, not even in image acquisition. An image straight-out-of the D60 needs work IMHO, more so than out of an S2. And that may tilt the balance for some in favor of the S2.

At this point I speculate if the initial softness out of a D60 - due to a more aggressive anti-aliasing (AA) filter - filters out the Bayer pattern structure and is that the reason why a less aggressive AA filter on the S2 produces sharper images out-of-the-camera but shows the same pattern in low-light areas.

Also, the D60 has other mechanical problems. I suspect that these affect a group of users, but not all. I for one, in my style of shooting, have never seen them. This is not to say that those are not show-stoppers for others.

John
JDavis37 said:
I've read many of your posts and you always seem fair and
objective, so I read this thread with some interest. As one who
sits on a fence ( S2 versus D60 ) it is interesting to see the
issues on each as they arise. The D60 issues are mostly with the
body, not the CMOS sensor. The S2 apparently has the opposite if it
does show any problems. I have just become aware of this noise
issue and will need to read more on the Canon forum to see if it
exists on the D60 as well. I own a little bit of Canon gear ( 3
lenses and a flash ) but not enough to keep me into Canon. Still,
if I cannot find overwhelming reasons to go the Nikon system route
( via S2 ) then I will obviously stay in Canon world due to slight
cost savings.
The question I have on this issue is simply how noticeable is the
problem? I do not tend to scrutinize every picture I take for
digital artifacts and usually feel composition and color tend to
capture a person's eye more so than sharpness and little flaws. I
think most of us on here have more demanding eyes than do the
general population. If one needs to look hard to see this problem
then I can easily live with it as my composition will be more the
limiting factor
Rinus said:
I believe that the trcak noise in my camera is a MAJOR issue. I do
not mean to say that it is an issue for most but I for one intend
to use film/digital for its announced capabilities. If I have to
let go of a good dynamic range because the algoriths do not live up
to their promised specs, I am not the one with the problem, Fuji
is. It proves that there is an issue with ordinary use of this
CCD/processor combination that sells under the Fuji name. I am sure
they know that this noise patterning is happening and I am also
sure they will deny it because admitting would cause a flood of
otherwise happy people returning perfectly normal operating cameras
for modification.
I am keeping a good score of all this because there may be an
ultimate solution to stop this noise in a newer version of EX
software which should be available as a free update.
I do not agree with Thom's assesment that the camera is performing
as it should and that it is to be expected. I do not believe for
one moment that he believes that himself but than again. I do not
test cameras and write books. Dynamic range is what digital is all
about just like dynamic range was the major force behind film
developement. The only people that had no problem were the few that
worked in well controlled and limited conditions and exposed
accordingly. That is hardly a situation for the masses. Even Ansel
Adams prooved that dynamic range was the key to his success.
As for people comparing cameras and being biased, that is just fine
with me beacause as long as people talk, problems like these are
discovered in the best systems and it gives me great knowledge of
other systems that I normally not even care to investigate on my
own. Largely due to the fact that I have heavely invested in the
Nikon company. I should really be allowed to vote in their stock
holders meeting.
Rinus of Calgary
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
The problem is noticeable only if you tend to attempt to adjust your image's shadows IMO. I have only seen it in these types of situations. However in my work, which is all outdoors, often times, I will have to shoot either sky or foreground. Net is the matrix won't get both. So I often times spot meter the primary subject matter I want to exposure for, then try to bracket from there. If I can, I will combine parts of both images in PS later, however often times, the wind won't allow this. If you are shooting a wide rangeing scenic shot, and you have wind, any wind at all, you will never line up the finer tree limbs. So if you happened to expose a tree lined sky line, with motion between exposures you wont' be able to work it unless you can push the same image.

By push, I simply mean bring up the darker areas, within reason. I realize if they are almost black, then that won't work. I don't have the ability to post images but, I guess I need to as I have a perfect example. This shot was of a cloud filled sky, tree line and reflection of the clouds in a pool of water. I exposed for the sky, got it, thus got a darker than necessary reflection. As I attempted to pull up the reflection, in the darker parts of the image, there it is, the track pattern, and this time it was too harsh to allow me to correct it.
Tracks just look bad, lets face it. Normal noise just looks like fine grain.

The issue I wanted all to see is that Fuji's response was to tell me, they couldn't see it, not as much as there wasn't a problem. Well, come on, I know what I sent them, it was there, and in a 5 page document, I painstakingly pointed out how in each image they could see it. Several have posted that this is normal response for such a situation. All I can say, Sorry I don't believe it. I work in sales, if I went through this with my customers after they had shown me the errors, then I don't think I would be selling anything else again there. However I do have to call on the same customers, Fuji, on the other hand will just keep getting new sales, and go on. No matter, for 2,400.00, per unit, they need to responsd alittle more professionally. I never got to speak to any of the"upper" level techs which also I didn't agee with.

Paul CAldwell
JDavis37 said:
I've read many of your posts and you always seem fair and
objective, so I read this thread with some interest. As one who
sits on a fence ( S2 versus D60 ) it is interesting to see the
issues on each as they arise. The D60 issues are mostly with the
body, not the CMOS sensor. The S2 apparently has the opposite if it
does show any problems. I have just become aware of this noise
issue and will need to read more on the Canon forum to see if it
exists on the D60 as well. I own a little bit of Canon gear ( 3
lenses and a flash ) but not enough to keep me into Canon. Still,
if I cannot find overwhelming reasons to go the Nikon system route
( via S2 ) then I will obviously stay in Canon world due to slight
cost savings.
The question I have on this issue is simply how noticeable is the
problem? I do not tend to scrutinize every picture I take for
digital artifacts and usually feel composition and color tend to
capture a person's eye more so than sharpness and little flaws. I
think most of us on here have more demanding eyes than do the
general population. If one needs to look hard to see this problem
then I can easily live with it as my composition will be more the
limiting factor
Rinus said:
I believe that the trcak noise in my camera is a MAJOR issue. I do
not mean to say that it is an issue for most but I for one intend
to use film/digital for its announced capabilities. If I have to
let go of a good dynamic range because the algoriths do not live up
to their promised specs, I am not the one with the problem, Fuji
is. It proves that there is an issue with ordinary use of this
CCD/processor combination that sells under the Fuji name. I am sure
they know that this noise patterning is happening and I am also
sure they will deny it because admitting would cause a flood of
otherwise happy people returning perfectly normal operating cameras
for modification.
I am keeping a good score of all this because there may be an
ultimate solution to stop this noise in a newer version of EX
software which should be available as a free update.
I do not agree with Thom's assesment that the camera is performing
as it should and that it is to be expected. I do not believe for
one moment that he believes that himself but than again. I do not
test cameras and write books. Dynamic range is what digital is all
about just like dynamic range was the major force behind film
developement. The only people that had no problem were the few that
worked in well controlled and limited conditions and exposed
accordingly. That is hardly a situation for the masses. Even Ansel
Adams prooved that dynamic range was the key to his success.
As for people comparing cameras and being biased, that is just fine
with me beacause as long as people talk, problems like these are
discovered in the best systems and it gives me great knowledge of
other systems that I normally not even care to investigate on my
own. Largely due to the fact that I have heavely invested in the
Nikon company. I should really be allowed to vote in their stock
holders meeting.
Rinus of Calgary
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Paul Caldwell said:
Fuji, on the other hand will just keep getting new sales, and go
on. No matter, for 2,400.00, per unit, they need to responsd
alittle more professionally. I never got to speak to any of
the"upper" level techs which also I didn't agee with.
Click to expand...
You are absoutely right. And BTW that is true w/ Canon too. These companies, these days, are hiding problems under the rug and only respond if there is significant market pressure.

John
Paul Caldwell said:
The problem is noticeable only if you tend to attempt to adjust
your image's shadows IMO. I have only seen it in these types of
situations. However in my work, which is all outdoors, often
times, I will have to shoot either sky or foreground. Net is the
matrix won't get both. So I often times spot meter the primary
subject matter I want to exposure for, then try to bracket from
there. If I can, I will combine parts of both images in PS later,
however often times, the wind won't allow this. If you are
shooting a wide rangeing scenic shot, and you have wind, any wind
at all, you will never line up the finer tree limbs. So if you
happened to expose a tree lined sky line, with motion between
exposures you wont' be able to work it unless you can push the same
image.
By push, I simply mean bring up the darker areas, within reason. I
realize if they are almost black, then that won't work. I don't
have the ability to post images but, I guess I need to as I have a
perfect example. This shot was of a cloud filled sky, tree line
and reflection of the clouds in a pool of water. I exposed for the
sky, got it, thus got a darker than necessary reflection. As I
attempted to pull up the reflection, in the darker parts of the
image, there it is, the track pattern, and this time it was too
harsh to allow me to correct it.
Tracks just look bad, lets face it. Normal noise just looks like
fine grain.

The issue I wanted all to see is that Fuji's response was to tell
me, they couldn't see it, not as much as there wasn't a problem.
Well, come on, I know what I sent them, it was there, and in a 5
page document, I painstakingly pointed out how in each image they
could see it. Several have posted that this is normal response for
such a situation. All I can say, Sorry I don't believe it. I work
in sales, if I went through this with my customers after they had
shown me the errors, then I don't think I would be selling anything
else again there. However I do have to call on the same customers,
Fuji, on the other hand will just keep getting new sales, and go
on. No matter, for 2,400.00, per unit, they need to responsd
alittle more professionally. I never got to speak to any of
the"upper" level techs which also I didn't agee with.

Paul CAldwell
Click to expand...
 
I do not own an S2 so I do not know how good or bad it is. I do own the D100 and D1H and have access to a D60. So I'm pretty good at picking out their problems.

Where did I say anything good about the S2? I didn't. I simply took objection to you saying that anyone who bought a D100 didn't research it enough.

Have fun with your D60. I know I will with my cameras.

--
Tony

http://homepage.mac.com/a5m http://www.pbase.com/a5m
John Davis said:
Clearly... I am dealing here with a sensitive bunch. Excuse me!

Yeah! These cameras are not perfect. The D60 has several problems,
the D100 ditto. It just happens that you do not recognize the same
on the S2.
Click to expand...
John Davis said:
Have a wonderful day... really!

John
Click to expand...
John Davis said:
Anthony Medici said:
Really John,

I don't know of any digital camera that doesn't have a number of
problems. If I took your suggestion, are you saying I won't have
ANY problems? I guess the issues my brother is having with the D60
are in his imagination and he shouldn't be considering returning
the D60 for one of the other cameras. At least, when he is able to
get a good image with the camera, the image is smooth. (What ever
that is?)

OBTW, I didn't jump without looking and I find it insulting that
since I didn't choose the D60, that must have been what I did. I am
very happy with my D100 and my D1H and I don't need to be told by
someone who has never used them that I pick the wrong cameras.

I'll apologies if you have purchased all the dSLR (there by being
one of the few who has bought more cameras than me) and have done
exhastive comparisons between them. In the meantime, I'm very glad
you are happy with your D60. And I will be very glad if you were
more objective.

--
Tony
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
It is a good idea to investigate all opinions. I found that most people (99.5%) will never ever see this pattern noise at all. It requires shooting in RAW mode and it also requires an underexposed region in your photograph that you are going to boost in contrast with the curve tool. This region is not an area that most would even care to use for anything else but shadows/black in your otherwise normal exposed image. Every image has light and dark and unless you have some real good reason for messing in the shadows (like the so called experts, INCLUDING ME) you will never be disappointed with the S2. I only stumbled upon it because I was trying to see what the limits of the camera are. I said in my previous post that recall by Fuji would be a silly idea because the Super CCD is working normal and creates a pattern of pixelization almost everywhere in the image if you want to do some serious oversharpening or contrast enhancement. This is a normal behaviour of any digital file that is processed from Bayer type CCD.

I hope that you all realize that I am aiming my so called "Expert" questions to "Expert" people that are defending any kind of shortcoming just because it is so. I am one to strife for utter perfection and anything away from a grainless razor sharp film demands scrutiny.

As for switching to another platform, I would not do that so quick. I was considering the D60 and found that it could probably do everything I needed with that but the S2 arrived and here I am.
Rinus of Calgary
 
Rinus,

Thanks for the clarification and shedding more light on the subject ( weak ppun intended though I will never admit it ). I feel certain it is something eyes like mine will never look for and isn't a concern though knowledge of it is appreciated in the event I buy the S2 and stumble upon it later! I just wish I could actually hold these darned cameras and shoot with them. Is always ahrd to pass up on the D60 as I keep seeing so many pictures that are simply filmlike in appearance and pleasant to the eyes. On flip side the D60 does not appear to do IR type pictures and while it is not something I want to do a lot of, I am curious about exploring. The out of camera jpgs of the S2 are a nice option in the event one wants to shoot a family picnic and do not wish to spend much time other than burning to a cd and sending out to family. Decisons decisions lol

Thanks again for clarifying this little noise issue. Anything negative posted about a camera always draws more focus than does positives and the clarification ehre should help prevent fence straddlers from jumping to one side or the other based upon a problem which will not be seen 99% of the time! :))))
Rinus said:
It is a good idea to investigate all opinions. I found that most
people (99.5%) will never ever see this pattern noise at all. It
requires shooting in RAW mode and it also requires an underexposed
region in your photograph that you are going to boost in contrast
with the curve tool. This region is not an area that most would
even care to use for anything else but shadows/black in your
otherwise normal exposed image. Every image has light and dark and
unless you have some real good reason for messing in the shadows
(like the so called experts, INCLUDING ME) you will never be
disappointed with the S2. I only stumbled upon it because I was
trying to see what the limits of the camera are. I said in my
previous post that recall by Fuji would be a silly idea because the
Super CCD is working normal and creates a pattern of pixelization
almost everywhere in the image if you want to do some serious
oversharpening or contrast enhancement. This is a normal behaviour
of any digital file that is processed from Bayer type CCD.
I hope that you all realize that I am aiming my so called "Expert"
questions to "Expert" people that are defending any kind of
shortcoming just because it is so. I am one to strife for utter
perfection and anything away from a grainless razor sharp film
demands scrutiny.
As for switching to another platform, I would not do that so quick.
I was considering the D60 and found that it could probably do
everything I needed with that but the S2 arrived and here I am.
Rinus of Calgary
Click to expand...
 
A lot of my friends are shooting IR images with conventional film cameras. It seems that the IR capabilities of the S2 are second to none. It is not always a good thing but I believe that this camera can easely be used to produce excellent IR results. Do a search in this forum. I have seen the IR methods posted here.
Rinus of Calgary
 
IR has caught my eye.. no doubt and I find the output to be startling in appearance. Of course I also know it is a bit of a pain to accomplish since the viewfinder is basically darkened and it will take some time to make the mind see what the camera will see.. or better yet, time to make the camera see what the mind is already seeing! But many years ago I had to work a bit to make the camera see the sunsets my mind was already seeing and that was half the fun.

The IR may be enough to get me off the fence. Is always neat to explore new worlds in photography and IR is totally new for me!
Rinus said:
A lot of my friends are shooting IR images with conventional film
cameras. It seems that the IR capabilities of the S2 are second to
none. It is not always a good thing but I believe that this camera
can easely be used to produce excellent IR results. Do a search in
this forum. I have seen the IR methods posted here.
Rinus of Calgary
Click to expand...
 
The S2 is always in 12 Mpixel mode. And in case you choise to have 6 Mpixel images it will resize to 6 Mpixel, just read the manual,

jacques.
 
As 'many jumped into the D100 or S2' the D60 wouldn't be in short supply.

I think Canon does have a small problem.

But just have a look at the test result, those who jumped for the S2, aren't disapponted,

jacques.
 
Noise of CMOS is worse than the noise of CCDs, Canon realy did a great job to use the CMOS sensors and by obtaining the good results,

jacques.
 
OK now I see you are using RAW mode and do your own settings in EX, this is trowing away many hundreds of man's years of labour invested by Fuji, you just think you will be able to invent your own square wheel ?

jacques.
 
Don't read that kind of stuff as it realy is outdated, Ansel didn't have the tools we all do have.

Even the film he used isn't comparable with film you can buy nowadays, Ansel made very, very fine, no EXCELLENT photographs, but don't use his ideas of how to expose today.

Or do you want to drive your car the way they drove their horse powered wagons or Ford Ts ?

jacques.
 
jacques said:
Don't read that kind of stuff as it realy is outdated, Ansel didn't
have the tools we all do have.

Even the film he used isn't comparable with film you can buy
nowadays, Ansel made very, very fine, no EXCELLENT photographs, but
don't use his ideas of how to expose today.

Or do you want to drive your car the way they drove their horse
powered wagons or Ford Ts ?

jacques.
Click to expand...
Jacques:

You actually make sense in your other replies... but if youthink that the Zone System no longer applies, well... I just say no more.

John
 
Paul Caldwell said:
The problem is noticeable only if you tend to attempt to adjust
your image's shadows IMO.
Click to expand...
Agreed. And from what I've seen so far, there is some variation between individual bodies from the same manufacturer. The prototype body I had was better than the production body I just received, though both are less noisy in the lowest EV than my D100.
Paul Caldwell said:
By push, I simply mean bring up the darker areas, within reason. I
realize if they are almost black, then that won't work. I don't
have the ability to post images but, I guess I need to as I have a
perfect example.
Click to expand...
Agree. In order to help you, you either have to be standing next to me with the problem, or I have to see the situation. I suspect you aren't working hard enough controlling contrast in the field.
Paul Caldwell said:
The issue I wanted all to see is that Fuji's response was to tell
me, they couldn't see it, not as much as there wasn't a problem.
Click to expand...
Well, I won't reveal the company you work for, but it has the same problem with some of its products.

But more to the point here: here in the US we're pretty much captive to marketing organizations. The cameras are designed in Japan by traditional Japanese engineering, and in the US all three have wholly owned subsidiaries that are primarily sales and marketing groups. The problem you had with Fuji is one I've heard at different times about Nikon, Canon, Minolta, Olympus, and a host of other camera companies. I've long argued that Nikon, for example, needs a US-based ombudsman who reports to Japan. This person needs to be very savvy about Nikon equipment to start with, highly technical, spend plenty of time in Japan interacting with the designers/manufacturing, needs to be advertised as the last resort to customers, and must have a budget to "make things right." But it's not just a Nikon problem, as you've discovered with Fuji.

--
Thom Hogan
author, Nikon Field Guide
author, Nikon Flash Guide
author, Complete Guide to the Nikon D100
author, Complete Guide to the Nikon D1, D1h, & D1x
http://www.bythom.com
 
Paul and Others..

Up until now I have not been able to see this track/pattern noise in any of my Photo's. Duane DeSieno who is looking at a RAW converter posted a call for some RAW files. I have posted several online for this reason and provided him a link.

In one particular image he pointed out what might be the symtom at hand.
http://208.231.0.96/bedpan/statue/thumbs_d/thumbs_p.html

Although I think it is slightly visable in the un-tweaked version (maybe I just want to see it), in the tweaked version it is very visable. Take a lookin the statue. The whole thing. Even zoomed out it is quite noticable.

I generally only shoot in jpg mode and have not done much work with RAW... Even this particular shot was done in RAW by accident.

Anyways. If anyone is talking/working with Fuji feel free to use this pic. The original RAW is provided, along with the original (straight out of the EX viewer), and my attempts (poor) to improve upon the image.

Mike
Paul Caldwell said:
I wanted to wait a day before I posted this information. Some may
ask if I want some cheese with my whine, and I understand. However
when you consider that 2400.00 is not a small piece of change, I
figure some people out there may want to know this.

Since I have owned my S2, I have been overall greatly impressed by
the image quality in that I have shot the D1x 15 months now and
several digital bodies before that for 4 years. Before that I
worked with film for at least 20 years. I have been always been in
an amateur with photography, in that I don’t use it for my primary
source of income. I have sold some of my work over the years, but
never in a large scale. I can also say that these last 4 years
have been by far the most interesting as the technology has grown
in leaps and bounds.

I understand that all new products will undergo teething troubles;
however I also expect that the company will attempt to address the
concerns if they are valid, and not deny them.

Since the S2 was released, there have some concerns over various
design issues and the like. Really not much has been said out
overall image faults. However over the last two weeks various
people have noticed the “patter or track” noise that the S2 can
produce in certain images. Please check out http://www.outbackphoto.com
and look at the 09/01/02 entry in Uwe’s S2 diary. Since this noise
is presented in a pattern or series of tracks it is very damaging
to the overall image. You can almost always see it in areas of an
image that were underexposed. I see it in my work in leaves or
water areas. Sometimes it can be removed, but many times the
removal process will damage the image enough that you can’t recover
the details. To assume that you can always get the perfect
exposure every time, is a wrong assumption, especially in outdoor
work. Many times, I am faced with a situation where I have to
underexpose an image to keep certain highlights from blowing out,
knowing that I have several methods to recover or combine later in
Photoshop.

As an attempt to assist Fuji with this problem, I complied a very
detailed listing of images and wrote a very detailed explanation of
the problem, i.e. how best to find it. This package was delivered
to their tech support group. I was told yesterday that no one at
Fuji was able to see the problem period. Now I know the image I
sent had the effect and others have reported it on this forum and
other sites. I have to say that to have a company just deny an
issue exists is pretty disappointing. I can reproduce it anytime
with my camera.

I wanted to post this so others will be both aware of the problem
and be aware of how callous a company like Fuji can be.

Paul Caldwell
[email protected]

--
Click to expand...
 
Paul Caldwell said:
I can only assume that its something to do with the Super CCD, my
subject matter. etc.
Click to expand...
I'm certain that the pattern is tied to the SuperCCD layout. After all, all the luminance data is in every other row, while the "noisy" R and B channels are in the other rows. To get luminance points on those alternate rows, you're working at deriving them from noisy data. I'd actually expect to see more line-oriented noise than what I've seen. Instead, it seems to be mosaiced, which would indicate that Fuji is doing something creative with the demosaic routines.
Paul F Caldwell said:
Don really see how fill flash would work,
most of the areas, I am shooting as the distance is too great.
Click to expand...
The thing that my late, great mentor Galen Rowell pointed out is that you don't need to actually use the flash to "light" the shadows. All you're using it for is to bring values up into the dynamic range the medium can capture. You sometimes only have to "nudge" shadows up a half stop or so in order to make a real difference. Remember, Galen's magic number was -1.7, and he was working with the assumption of a 5-6 stop dynamic range.
Paul F Caldwell said:
But
then again several of the images I would sent to Fuji would have
been helped, I just didn't think of it at the time.
Click to expand...
Well, I've been there, too. You shoot, you learn.
Paul F Caldwell said:
I appreciate you taking the time to answer in the detail you did.
Click to expand...
No worries, mate. The great thing about these forums is that we all learn from others. I try to put back as much as I've taken...

--
Thom Hogan
author, Nikon Field Guide
author, Nikon Flash Guide
author, Complete Guide to the Nikon D100
author, Complete Guide to the Nikon D1, D1h, & D1x
http://www.bythom.com
 
Rick Boden said:
I'm glad to see that there are others who have been having the same
problems as I. Recenly I photographed someone on a warm background
and the streaks were visible in areas that I would not consider
underexposed. Switching to CMYK made them really stand out as does
major Photoshop work. I am trying to do a comparison test with
another S2 owner to make I don't have a bad camera.
Click to expand...
That doesn't seem like the same problem. Can you post an example?

--
Thom Hogan
author, Nikon Field Guide
author, Nikon Flash Guide
author, Complete Guide to the Nikon D100
author, Complete Guide to the Nikon D1, D1h, & D1x
http://www.bythom.com
 
jacques said:
OK now I see you are using RAW mode and do your own settings in EX,
this is trowing away many hundreds of man's years of labour
invested by Fuji, you just think you will be able to invent your
own square wheel ?
Click to expand...
I think hat Fuji knew that after they included the RAW converter LX free with camera they had to come up with a better version it the EX if they wanted to sell it for an additional (not little) cost.

The LX version is like the little spare wheel you get in most new cars. The EX version is a full size spare and it MUST be used with the manual settings or it would just be like the little wheel (LX) version. Modifying further in EX is the only way to get a good conversion out of the software. I do not want to overstate its capabilities but most RAW conversion tools are like custom processing negatives with the click of a button. Unfortunately for those that have never processed negatives or even know why that would make a difference, the EX version will remain a mystery. I am sure that a few good books on Photoshop will also demystify the workings of the RAW conversion tool. Learn about the curves tool and the levels tool. Mostly learn about sensitometry in film emulsions and how to affect changes during exposure and processing. All this together will add up to a fantastically well exposed and converted image. short of this, do like most others and just take pictures, decide what you like and learn from there.

This wheel ain't square, it is simply a better than average all season conversion wheel.
Rinus of Calgary
Ain't this fun?
 
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