Reading mode: Light Dark

X3F, could somebody donate

Go to last post
FYI:
http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/sigma9sd/

Notice the dull spectrum of sigma with extended greenish-yellow zone and no pure saturated green (those damn curves should NOT be flat in the middle).

Also, if you're familiar with the way color vision works, you'll see that Canon spectral response maps much more closely to eye's spectral sensitivity curves.

That is, in short, the reason why Bayer colors simply look better. That is also the reason why flaws in color rendition can not be corrected in Photoshop (there are simply no well-defined "peaks" corresponding to maximums of spectral sensitivities - pure green and "not so pure" green are rendered as the same dull shade of green).
 
Well, I guess I can't stay out of it. Here is another image of her. I clicked on the color wheel to reduce the yellow. I don't work with color if I can avoid it. So if it looks worse, say-la-v-v. My wife who is better with colors thinks she is a little pale. I will take opinions.

http://www.pbase.com/image/21126095

--
It's a tough job, living in Hawaii, but someone has to do it!!!

.......Feel The Power.........Sigma.....SD9..........

http://www.lightreflection.com
http://www.silveroaksranch.com
http://www.pbase.com/rickdecker
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/user_home
 
Dude,

Don't waste your time (as I am doing right now). I don't care.
I simply enjoy my camera as you are obviously enjoying yours.
The only color vision I care about is my own and so should you.

But you could have tried a little harder convincing us (if that's what your were doing) with posting a better picture though (regardless of the colour correctness in your eyes). Or did you just want to convince yourself and looked our way for help ? In that case I think you have fallen on deaf ears (or blind eyes as the case may be).

Peace,

Marcel
Dmitriy Belenko said:
FYI:
http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/sigma9sd/

Notice the dull spectrum of sigma with extended greenish-yellow
zone and no pure saturated green (those damn curves should NOT be
flat in the middle).

Also, if you're familiar with the way color vision works, you'll
see that Canon spectral response maps much more closely to eye's
spectral sensitivity curves.

That is, in short, the reason why Bayer colors simply look better.
That is also the reason why flaws in color rendition can not be
corrected in Photoshop (there are simply no well-defined "peaks"
corresponding to maximums of spectral sensitivities - pure green
and "not so pure" green are rendered as the same dull shade of
green).
Click to expand...
 
Hi Rick,

Thanks for asking. We had a big thunderstorm last night and apparently lightning hit one of the main powerlines. We were without power for about 14 hours. When we got it back my powerbrick for my laptop was dead and another one for one my usb drives as well. So I'm back to the internet cafes until I can get a new brick from ibm. Hopefully that won't be longer than a couple days.

on the other hand fresh baked oysters smothered in chopped garlic and chili oil are only about a dime apiece. Big mussells are even less. Fresh meals everyday -- no refrigerator. Hot, muggy, a couple typhoons and a few thunderstorms. Haven't been out to take many pics yet.

Later,

Mike
rick decker said:
Well since it is my shot and my daughter, I am staying out of this.
I do have the X3F file..just found it after a search. Anyone wants
it and I wlll upload it.

How are things Mike?

Rick
--
It's a tough job, living in Hawaii but someone has to do it!!!

.......Feel The Power.........Sigma.....SD9..........

http://www.lightreflection.com
http://www.silveroaksranch.com
http://www.pbase.com/rickdecker
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/user_home
Click to expand...
 
Dmitriy Belenko said:
No, you don't lose dynamic range (distance if we use analogy with
trains) if you change the number of gradations (train stations).
You still have to cover the same 2 thousand miles. You just make
fewer stops (these are metaphorical stops, they have nothing to do
with f/stops or exposure).
Click to expand...
Please, pay attention to what sg10 had to say.

Rephrasing: by your logic two tone, black & white (no grayscale) picture has the same dynamic range as 48bit one.

Once you enter the digital realm (storing your ADC data) the dynamic range and bid depth are not ortoghonal. On the contrary.

The dynamic range defined as differenece between detector noise level (approximate of black, that setting aside signal/noice separation) and the amount of light causing saturation in all chanels (white) are characteristics of the sensor.

How much information can be gathered in this range is the resolution.

Once you convert the information to digital form, all that matters is the available gradation in the above range which is directly proportional to the exponent of the bit depth. (Being nice, I will not emulate your drift: "if you can handle the math").

Conventional information measure is bit, hence the more bits you have the better. Not enough bits and you will have artifacts (as demonstrated by sg10) and, at the same time lack of colour resolution (ditto).

On top of that is human perception (essentially with logarithmic characteristics but highly adaptable). You migh find interesting that it varies deeply between populations: people living in the deserts resolve far more brownish- yellowish colours and hardly any green tones compared to these whose backyard is the rain forest. The nice thing is that the differences are environmental (cultural) rather than genetic.

Anyhow, I have difficutlies following the argument that less information in the digitized image is beneficial in obtaining the artistic goal.

Wojtek
 
Thank you. You saved me from having to ask the next obvious question, which was, does a file format conversion to a 1 color image retain the same dynamic range as 36-bit?

:^)

This is silly, isn't it?
Wojciech Burkot said:
Dmitriy Belenko said:
No, you don't lose dynamic range (distance if we use analogy with
trains) if you change the number of gradations (train stations).
You still have to cover the same 2 thousand miles. You just make
fewer stops (these are metaphorical stops, they have nothing to do
with f/stops or exposure).
Click to expand...
Please, pay attention to what sg10 had to say.
Rephrasing: by your logic two tone, black & white (no grayscale)
picture has the same dynamic range as 48bit one.

Once you enter the digital realm (storing your ADC data) the
dynamic range and bid depth are not ortoghonal. On the contrary.

The dynamic range defined as differenece between detector noise
level (approximate of black, that setting aside signal/noice
separation) and the amount of light causing saturation in all
chanels (white) are characteristics of the sensor.

How much information can be gathered in this range is the resolution.
Once you convert the information to digital form, all that matters
is the available gradation in the above range which is directly
proportional to the exponent of the bit depth. (Being nice, I will
not emulate your drift: "if you can handle the math").

Conventional information measure is bit, hence the more bits you
have the better. Not enough bits and you will have artifacts (as
demonstrated by sg10) and, at the same time lack of colour
resolution (ditto).

On top of that is human perception (essentially with logarithmic
characteristics but highly adaptable). You migh find interesting
that it varies deeply between populations: people living in the
deserts resolve far more brownish- yellowish colours and hardly any
green tones compared to these whose backyard is the rain forest.
The nice thing is that the differences are environmental (cultural)
rather than genetic.

Anyhow, I have difficutlies following the argument that less
information in the digitized image is beneficial in obtaining the
artistic goal.

Wojtek
Click to expand...
--
http://www.pbase.com/imageprocessing/sd9
 
sg10 said:
Thank you. You saved me from having to ask the next obvious
question, which was, does a file format conversion to a 1 color
image retain the same dynamic range as 36-bit?
Click to expand...
At your service :-).
sg10 said:
:^)

This is silly, isn't it?
Click to expand...
No, it is only arrogant. Of all the rethorics flaws unjustified reference to authority ( my diploma is better than yours) I hate most.

Getting to the real thing I have looked at the specturm shots posted in another post in this thread. In quite some range in greens SD9 is effectively one colour camera :-(. No amount of colour correction could resolve the grades without red and blue chanels fireing. For some reason
it does notseem to affect the good images posted here :-).

Wojtek
sg10 said:
Wojciech Burkot said:
Dmitriy Belenko said:
No, you don't lose dynamic range (distance if we use analogy with
trains) if you change the number of gradations (train stations).
You still have to cover the same 2 thousand miles. You just make
fewer stops (these are metaphorical stops, they have nothing to do
with f/stops or exposure).
Click to expand...
Please, pay attention to what sg10 had to say.
Rephrasing: by your logic two tone, black & white (no grayscale)
picture has the same dynamic range as 48bit one.

Once you enter the digital realm (storing your ADC data) the
dynamic range and bid depth are not ortoghonal. On the contrary.

The dynamic range defined as differenece between detector noise
level (approximate of black, that setting aside signal/noice
separation) and the amount of light causing saturation in all
chanels (white) are characteristics of the sensor.

How much information can be gathered in this range is the resolution.
Once you convert the information to digital form, all that matters
is the available gradation in the above range which is directly
proportional to the exponent of the bit depth. (Being nice, I will
not emulate your drift: "if you can handle the math").

Conventional information measure is bit, hence the more bits you
have the better. Not enough bits and you will have artifacts (as
demonstrated by sg10) and, at the same time lack of colour
resolution (ditto).

On top of that is human perception (essentially with logarithmic
characteristics but highly adaptable). You migh find interesting
that it varies deeply between populations: people living in the
deserts resolve far more brownish- yellowish colours and hardly any
green tones compared to these whose backyard is the rain forest.
The nice thing is that the differences are environmental (cultural)
rather than genetic.

Anyhow, I have difficutlies following the argument that less
information in the digitized image is beneficial in obtaining the
artistic goal.

Wojtek
Click to expand...
--
http://www.pbase.com/imageprocessing/sd9
Click to expand...
 
Wojciech Burkot said:
Getting to the real thing I have looked at the specturm shots
posted in another post in this thread. In quite some range in
greens SD9 is effectively one colour camera :-(. No amount of
colour correction could resolve the grades without red and blue
chanels fireing. For some reason
it does notseem to affect the good images posted here :-).
Click to expand...
This issue was put to rest soem time ago in this forum: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1027&message=5893102
 
Just to clarify something about these pictures (interesting comparison), and with apologies if I've misunderstood:

Were they both from the 'sample galleries' from DPReview? I had a quick look there, and found a 10D picture of the bridge with a boat in the foreground, and a SD9 picture of just the bridge.

If those were the pictures, the bridge apparently takes up about half the sensor in the 10D picture, but most of the sensor in the SD9 picture. IE in that case you're comparing a 3mp eos-10D (half of a normal 10d picture) with a full SD9 picture. Presumably if the bridge had covered the same fraction of the sensor in the 10D (most of it), the image would contain more detail.

Again, sorry if I've misunderstood or misinterpreted. The detail in the SD9 picture is certainly attractive.

Best wishes,

Marky
 
Thanks for a link.
Sorry for not finding it myself.

Wojtek
Brian Slater said:
Wojciech Burkot said:
Getting to the real thing I have looked at the specturm shots
posted in another post in this thread. In quite some range in
greens SD9 is effectively one colour camera :-(. No amount of
colour correction could resolve the grades without red and blue
chanels fireing. For some reason
it does notseem to affect the good images posted here :-).
Click to expand...
This issue was put to rest soem time ago in this forum:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1027&message=5893102
Click to expand...
 
Kodak's graphic supporting their patented, proprietary ERI format...



"A digital camera typically captures a raw image having a larger color gamut (range of colors) and dynamic range (range of brightness) than can be retained when the image is "rendered" to form the JPEG image file." --Kodak
 
Marky said:
Just to clarify something about these pictures (interesting
comparison), and with apologies if I've misunderstood:
Click to expand...
Not at all...
Marky said:
If those were the pictures, the bridge apparently takes up about
half the sensor in the 10D picture, but most of the sensor in the
SD9 picture. IE in that case you're comparing a 3mp eos-10D (half
of a normal 10d picture) with a full SD9 picture. Presumably if the
bridge had covered the same fraction of the sensor in the 10D (most
of it), the image would contain more detail.
Click to expand...
Here are the two root images...

Canon D60 (cited by dpreview as a bit better than the 10D):

http://img.dpreview.com/reviews/SigmaSD9/Samples/Compared/outdoor/d30_CRW_1807_RT8.jpg

SD-9:

http://img.dpreview.com/reviews/SigmaSD9/Samples/Compared/outdoor/sd9_IMG01107.jpg

Interestingly there is a slight vantage point difference between the two shots, as you point out. But if you count railing posts from the Sunlit railings, you can see that the two cameras are placed at the same distance from the bridge and boats (which remain anchored in both shots). It also looks like slight difference is between crop factors, Canon's 1.6 to Sigma's 1.7, that is certainly fair, its what will happen in real life at the same distance.

Upon closer inspection, my fears about Phil being too charitable to Canon seem somwhat confirmed, clearly the red roof detail to the right of his selected crop section shows an even more impressive color resolution advange in favor of the SD-9. So why didn't he select that area for the crop-set comparision?

If you load the two base images and flip back and forth, IMO it is very clear the 6MP Canon is simply not in the same league as the SD-9 (at least in this test) in terms of full color resoultion, while eating almost 2x the pixel bandwidth.
 
Is your monitor calibrated properly? I'm not going after you, I'm being serious because that's about the worse color job I've seen in awhile. The most surprising thing is that this came from you.

It's crossed my mnd that you may have been joking and I missed it..

--Steve
 
sg10 said:
Marky said:
Just to clarify something about these pictures (interesting
comparison), and with apologies if I've misunderstood:
Click to expand...
Not at all...
sg10 said:
If those were the pictures, the bridge apparently takes up about
half the sensor in the 10D picture, but most of the sensor in the
SD9 picture. IE in that case you're comparing a 3mp eos-10D (half
of a normal 10d picture) with a full SD9 picture. Presumably if the
bridge had covered the same fraction of the sensor in the 10D (most
of it), the image would contain more detail.
Click to expand...
Here are the two root images...
Click to expand...
Two corrections/additions...

1) I mistakenly grabbed the D30 image link, sorry. My comments apply to the D60 image, not the D30. The D60 link is here.... http://img.dpreview.com/reviews/SigmaSD9/Samples/Compared/outdoor/d60_CRW_5303_RT8.jpg

2) Phil actually addresses the vanatage point difference in the review text--he moved the SD-9 back about 12 feet to compensate for the crop factor compared to the D60, which clearly gave the D60 an unfair advantage (to no avail).
 
I double majored in Marketing and Psychology with a minor in Theology (just for kicks, I'm not even a Christian) from a college where only 4% graduate (obviously a pushover for any idiot who enrolls). What Canon does is send information that brainwashes its users and provides software that causes rapid degeneration of color sensitivity. The end result is users think their overblown, blurry, cartoon-like colored images are actually good reproductions. If this wasn't enough, the users later feel somewhat scammed and try to push their inferior intellects and feelings of insecurity and inferiority in forums like this one, knowing they made the wrong choice by choosing their blurry camera over the SD9.

See. Just because I have a degree doesn't mean that what I'm saying isn't total bulls* t. Nor does it mean having an advanced knowledge of subject makes me right, or not a troll.
 
Dmitriy Belenko said:
And she's so yellow as if she was suffering from hepatitis. Seems
to be impossible to correct, either.
Click to expand...
Dmitry my dear fellow - I am ashamed to admit I only have totally worthless degrees in liberal arts form Cambridge plus an equally undesirable MBA from a dumb USA. I also own neither a Canon nor a Sigma. I AM TROLLING. But sir, as one with absolutely no axe to grind, I have to say that you clearly have a problem with your colour sense or your monitor - where on earth do you get this "yellow" stuff from and compare it with a blown out portrait with all colour information gone? Your math is wonderful, your photography leaves a certain amount to be desired. And what is so wrong with sharp? Deliberately opening a stop or two changes depth of field - not sharpness. The lack of sharp in the picture was due to the lens / chip combination, not your choice. Let us not confuse academic superiority with everything else that goes into producing a fine photograph. Frankly, your samples have gone a long way to convince me to move on to an SD9 from my Nikon 5700.
Dmitriy Belenko said:
rick decker said:
http://www.pbase.com/image/14135357
Dmitriy Belenko said:
rick decker said:
http://www.lightreflection.com/IMG00880.X3F

http://www.lightreflection.com/IMG01442.X3F

http://www.lightreflection.com/IMG06016.X3F
aaronb said:
I have pretty much decided to scrap my 10D for an SD9. I have
downloaded SPP and processed the sample X3F files from sigma. I d
like to try some files that arent supplied by Sigma, would anyone
be kind enough to donate a file or two?? please :) drop me an email
--
Aaron Bass
http://www.ignition-media.net
Click to expand...
--
It's a tough job, living in Hawaii but someone has to do it!!!

.......Feel The Power.........Sigma.....SD9..........

http://www.lightreflection.com
http://www.silveroaksranch.com
http://www.pbase.com/rickdecker
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/user_home
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
It's a tough job, living in Hawaii but someone has to do it!!!

.......Feel The Power.........Sigma.....SD9..........

http://www.lightreflection.com
http://www.silveroaksranch.com
http://www.pbase.com/rickdecker
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/user_home
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
5700, 995
patrickh
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Sigma 300-600 4 DG OS Sports – Review After 14 Days of Testing
Replies
1
Views
53K
jerste
J
R
Finding Atlantis (2020 i9 iMac w/5700XT, Mushkin REDLINE, Delidded, vented, copper foam sinks)
Replies
0
Views
17K
RLight
R
lokatz
G9II vs OM-1 compared for bird shooting - Part IV
2 3
Replies
42
Views
50K
lokatz
lokatz
J
Renting the Leica Q2
3 4 5
Replies
93
Views
8K
Ed B
Ed B
E
Elliott's Saved Setup Text: 2021, 2022, 2023
Replies
16
Views
17K
marlyd
M

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