Reading mode: Light Dark

ISO 800 ZERO NR SD1 TEST (very low light)

Go to last post
I put it there in two versions and offer raw files to anyone sending a request for them. You can then adjust to taste.
desinteresadamente said:
is there any reason to set the chroma noise reduction to default? may you post the image with chrominance noise reduction to zero?
Thank you.
Click to expand...
--
Laurence
laurence at appledore-farm dot com

La chance ne sourit qu'aux esprits bien préparés.
Chance favors the prepared mind.
Louis Pasteur

http://www.pbase.com/lmatson
http://www.pbase.com/sigmadslr
http://www.howardmyerslaw.com
 
Thank you for taking the time to present these images and your continuing involvement in the forum.

Try to ignore the extremely rude people dissing you.

MM
 
Why do you send this as a message as well? Really strange.

If you want to communicate by messages, then do so. If you want to communicate in the forum, then do so. There is no need for a double-pronged attack.
cinefeel said:
To L. Matson:

Yes, that is exactly what I am saying.

0 sharpening (according to the SPP slider) is EXTREMELY oversharpened, that much should be obvious.

-2.0 is totally unsharpened, and is equivalent to roughly what -0.8 was in SPP4.2

-1.2 is therefore equivalent to what 0.0 was in SPP4.2

The numbers SPP uses mean absolutely nothing in an of themselves!
Click to expand...
--
Laurence
laurence at appledore-farm dot com

La chance ne sourit qu'aux esprits bien préparés.
Chance favors the prepared mind.
Louis Pasteur

http://www.pbase.com/lmatson
http://www.pbase.com/sigmadslr
http://www.howardmyerslaw.com
 
cinefeel said:
there is no attack
Click to expand...
Oh...but there was an attack -- not because of something you said, but because of something you inadvertently did: by posting one of the first, truely high-quality (and High ISO to Boot) images from the SD1, where other professional Sigma Ambassadors have repeatedly tried to vain, and have ultimately failed to simply and professionally "show" what the new SD1 can actually do in the right hands - Sigma sanctioned, or not.

Remember the recent thread that was mistakenly titled: "Finally one worth showing " that was instead "showing" an SD1 image (or two) that didn't quite measure up to it's baldly braggadocio thread billing? Well.... that very same, exact title/heading would be infinitely more appropriate for this particular thread that really is posting an SD1 image that is "Finally one worth showing ". But the problem for some is the fact that was posted by you and not one of the official Big Guns of Sigma Inc. And on top of that, In one fell swoop, you have easily, and completely trumped most all of them in your overall quality, content, in technique and importantly in providing accurate and effective post processing informational details that the local Sigma cartel either completely botched in their initial SD1 sample images, or really didn't know about until someone like yourself came along and began to seriously work-out some of the SPP PP "bugs" - that have visibly plagued almost every other SD1 image posted so far - even those that were shot at base ISO's of 100 (like the badly executed cat photo).

So...if I were you, I'd find some durable protective covering and prepare yourself for some more of these kinds of offensive/defensive "attacks" - and other assorted status defending assaults. But never the less, keep up the good fight in bringing out the potential best of what has been seen by many as a very bad PR situation for Sigma, and it's new flagship : the SD1. At least by your "test" images here, we've seen much better of what it can ultimately produce on a higher-level (not still sure it's up to MF-Like quality) when properly used and post processed.
 
stevielee said:
cinefeel said:
there is no attack
Click to expand...
Oh...but there was an attack -- not because of something you said, but because of something you inadvertently did: by posting one of the first, truely high-quality (and High ISO to Boot) images from the SD1
Click to expand...
Well frankly that's arguable, I think there have been lots of impressive SD-1 images in terms of quality (you are saying none of Carls' were any good? Really?). But I don't see anyone else taking that as an attack - I thanked him for producing it so people can see some good ISO results, which has been rare and is welcome to behold.

You obviously have things confused about who considers what an attack. Laurence is just trying to get to the root of a claim of sharpening. I still am not sure I see -2.0 as equivalent to SPP -0.8, even if Carl currently thinks so...

--
---> Kendall
http://InsideAperture.com
http://www.pbase.com/kgelner
http://www.pbase.com/sigmadslr/user_home
 
the term 'test shot' to be able to present worst ever images.

These don't tell me anything about the SD1, to boot.
 
jrdigitalart said:
stevielee said:
... that didn't quite measure up to it's baldly braggadocio thread billing?
Click to expand...
baldly? I thought the cat had plenty of fur actually. ;)
Click to expand...
Ha!...Good one JR.

And why yes....yes you are quite correct that the cat in that infamous SD1 (finally worth showing) image did most assuredly have a nice thick coat of lustrous fat cat fur.. But it's just that the cat, who was most usually covered with it's mixed grey tones of fur , was now surprisingly sprinkled with bits of colors this & that.

It could be said that as the cat quietly sat, it's flat, two dimension capture on matte, most magically morphed into an image of more curiously color speckled cat, that quietly sat, through all of the strangely distracting noises from chroma colored gnat's that buzzed about the cat's - shadowy ears. Maybe the cat, should have been covered with a hat, so that the choma color of this and that would once again, magically disappear...
Kendall Helmstetter Gelner said:
I think there have been lots of impressive SD-1 images in terms of quality (you are saying none of Carls' were any good? Really?). But I don't see anyone else taking that as an attack - I thanked him for producing it so people can see some good ISO results, which has been rare and is welcome to behold.
Click to expand...
You are certainly correct on this point. Carl's images, regardless of what particular camera he happens to hold, is most always on another level altogether - compared to all the the decidedly average official Sigma photographs we see on this forum - since the SD1 was announced/released. I was of course, referring specifically to majority of the banal-to-bad SD1 images that we've all seen posted here on DPReview ad-nauseum. And Carl usually post his stuff on his own personal site (which I enjoy). He occasionally comments here, but he's not what I would generally think of as one of the self-appointed, official Sigma Ambassadors on DPReview's Sigma Forum...so, that's why I sorta didn't include him in my "best SD1 image so far" equation.

Thanks again for all your concerned corrections - none the less....

And
 
Don't really understand the slew of antagonistic replies in this thread. Sheesh. Even though the SD1 is irrelevant to me because of its price I'm grateful for folks trying to illustrate performance, artistic merit really doesn't come into it (though I think this shot has quite nice rendering actually).

Perhaps you should go buy yourself an SD1 and post some of your own samples if you don't like the compositions posted by others.
 
mrkr said:
the term 'test shot' to be able to present worst ever images.

These don't tell me anything about the SD1, to boot.
Click to expand...
They probably are'nt "telling" you "anything" because it appears that you are just not listening to what they have might have to to say to you - which IMO, they say pretty clearly, and in a big way: that the SD1 can do a very respectable - even outstanding - (as is the case with the OP test images) higher ISO image when executed by someone who happens to know how they might get the most out of the camera without having to color-chroming it all up - as we have unfortunately witnessed from a rather noisy ISO 100 cat photo, as well as many other badly PP SD1 photos - some of which were even posted on Sigma's Official SD1 online sample page.

Seems that one man's "pathetic", is another's sublime. Go figure!

And "people" do "misuse" terms, meanings and results quite often here in Sigmaland. Some of the most average-to-horrid SD1 images are hailed by a few as "worth showing" and "amazing" -- while a couple of the best images are dissed & dismissed as pathetic and the worst ever .

It's all in the eyes and skill of the beholder it would seem.

Had any optometrist visit lately???
 
I like the image in terms of lightning and noise, but i dislike the blurry crop of the switches because the chroma noise reduction. I prefer detail over a blurry noise free image any day.

I consider Cinefeel an awesome skilled member of here, but I think still even more is possible to reach in terms of Sd1 processing.Come on Cine! Delight us with some tasty captures.
Regards.
 
desinteresadamente said:
I like the image in terms of lightning and noise, but i dislike the blurry crop of the switches because the chroma noise reduction. I prefer detail over a blurry noise free image any day.
Click to expand...
Yes, I do agree with you on the "noise reduction" situation in these images... but , they are still (by far) some of the best examples of higher ISO photos I've seen yet coming out of the SD1. As I viewed the image in question on my LaCie 730, there still appears to be enough espectably fine detail - given the amount of necessary NR that he probably had to apply in keeping all the chroma critters at bay.
desinteresadamente said:
I consider Cinefeel an awesome skilled member of here, but I think still even more is possible to reach in terms of Sd1 processing.Come on Cine! Delight us with some tasty captures.
Click to expand...
You may well be correct in this, but up until now, this kitchen still-life image is one of the first photos I've seen from the SD1 (at any ISO) that has that definite higher-end imaging wow factor. Most everything else I've seen (with the exception of Carl's SD1 stuff on his site/blog, and a couple of other folks random samples), has been flat and or badly PP. I would agree with Tom hogan that the Official/ images on Sigma's SD1 sample page are:

" beyond terrible. Very high in contrast, with highlights often pushing up into lack of detail range, the landscapes look like 1980's amateur slide film exposures, in one I see a slight edge-to-edge lens problem, one is clearly not focused correctly (slight front focus), the Foveon magenta/green hue issue still seems present in a few of the images, and overall Sigma seems to have picked images solely to try to emphasize lack of moire over everything else. "

So in terms of evaluating cinefeel's prominently labeled: test images , I'd say that he's somehow managed to take the SD1's higher resolution (and higher ISO) potential a bit further than almost anyone else before him -- including the Official Sigma SD1 examples posted before him.

And like you, I do encourage him to continue exploring and refining the SD1's output. Using his posted image above as a marker, I'd say he's off to a pretty decent start - NR and all...
 
Well my humble asus laptop worth 8 times minus than your monitor, and the lcd is crappy, but I'll get married on friday so currently this is my top spot, so please I want to make you a few questions: How are the tonal transitions? Are there nuances lost in bayer like little refletions and so?
I hope so.
Coming from the nikon camp, how do you find on the foveon images?
Regards
 
desinteresadamente said:
Well my humble asus laptop worth 8 times minus than your monitor, and the lcd is crappy, but I'll get married on friday so currently this is my top spot, so please I want to make you a few questions: How are the tonal transitions? Are there nuances lost in bayer like little refletions and so?
I hope so.
Coming from the nikon camp, how do you find on the foveon images?
Regards
Click to expand...
And I also view much of my web browsing on a similarly "crappy" 2008 MacBook Pro LCD. The Lacie 730 is mainly used as part of my work-station, work-flow platform - paired with an 8-core Mac Pro and an Epson 3800 printer. I generally don't do alot of my online stuff on that set-up unless I want, or need view (evaluate) more accurate color and fine detail of something posted online (as I have done with many of the images posted here on DPReview).

To answer your questions as best I can: the "tonal transitions" of cinefeel's kitchen test image shows fair to good tonal gradations - as viewedby me in an Adobe RGB color-space, and Gamma set to 2.2. The Lacie has the very useful ability to project more than 100% of this color-space and is quite accurate in it's portraying even minor, but critical color variations and their associated tonal rolls-offs (smoothness).

I do see some chroma chop in the shadow area's of the image, as well as some obvious default high-ISO NR smearing of the finer-detailed objects (which I did report to him in my first response/comment to his image in this thread).

As far as any of the images "nuances" being found, or "lost" , I would really have to view the RAW image that has been properly converted to be better able to see where this posted test example differs in overall content and tone than it does with the original. And as someone who's been working for almost 3 years with one of Bayer's higher-end DSLR's, I think that Bayer is most certainly able to capture subtle nuances as well, if not better than Foveon sensor'ed cameras currently do -- include the new SD1.

I'm most coming from the Canon camp so to answer you last question, I find most of Foveon's images usually over-amped with too much applied sharpening (in-camera, or in PP), excessive color saturation (again, either in-camera, or in PP), and like several of the images posted on DPReview, I see Foveon based images as having a soft-spot for the magenta side of things - becoming more pronounce the higher the ISO. That's why cinefeel's test image above struck me as kind of breaking with the Foveon's magenta-tinged Higher ISO shots. He seemed to somehow be able to defeat the Foveon magenta monster in producing a more neutral, cooler color-cast than is the norm for these kinds of low-light Foveon Based images.

And a kind regard to you as well.....
 
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