-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Banding on Z9
- Thread starter vtpeters
- Start date
My current favorite walkaround camera, the Q2M, has a leaf shutter.
The pulse repetition frequency of the pulse width modulation of the light that's causing the problem is about 2500 Hz. This high frequency is not unusual for modern stage lighting. A slower shutter speed will help.Hi,
I've read about the risk of banding showing up in photos, but I seem to remember that this only happens at slow shutter speeds.
I'm currently editing my photos of a live concert by Swedisch guitarist Yngwie Malmsteen and noticed (what I believe to be) banding in some of my photos.
Below you see an unedited RAW photo exported from Lightroom to JPEG at a resolution of 2000 x 3000 pixels. On the photo above and around the head of the guitarist you can clearly see the banding in de red background.
Nikon Z 9 with Z 70-200mm S @ 99mm - ISO1800 - f/2.8 - 1/320s
Is there a way to prevent this from happening?
Or is there a clever way to get rid of this in post-processing?
Or is this just one of the disadvantages of a shutterless camera?
How fast is the Z9 shutter? - the last word
This is one in a series of posts on the Nikon Z9. You should be able to find all the posts about that camera in the Category List on the right sidebar, below the Articles widget. There’s a drop-down menu there that you can use to get to all the posts in this series; just
blog.kasson.com
Some people have had good luck with dealing with this in post using a Photoshop FFT plugin.
--
the last word the last word - Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.
Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.
blog.kasson.com
M
MCLV
Guest
As I described here https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65887363 , using mechanical shutter will blur the banding. For f/2.8 and assuming shutter location 4 mm in front of the sensor plane we get a diameter of light cone of 4 mm / 2.8 = approximately 1.4 mm. Therefore, blurring caused by mechanical shutter would be roughly 1.4 mm / 24 mm = 5.8% of image height and 1.4 mm / 24 mm * 2000 = 117 pixels of the original image. Hence, I simulated how the image would look if a mechanical shutter was used by applying a linear blur of 117 pixels in vertical direction. I then applied layer mask around Yngwie, so he is not completely blurry. You can see results below.
Original - Electronic shutter
Simulated mechanical shutter at f/2.8
Original - Electronic shutter
Simulated mechanical shutter at f/2.8
AlireaPhotography
Forum Enthusiast
- Messages
- 493
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 558
No, it would happen with a camera with mechanical shutter, but the effect is so blurred that hardly you can notice it even when looking carefully. The mechanical shutter, specially in lower speeds makes it blurred without hard edges. Mechanical shutter is not as accurate as electronic shutter which helps in this case to make it less noticeable. I did a side by side comparison some time ago here and returned my Z9 because of that.
but I think the best solution now is to use the new High-Frequency Flicker Reduction which came with recent upgrade? I think this is a very common scenario, when the subject has led backlit and you can enable it always in this sort of scenarios? I am really looking for this issue to get resolved and buy Z9 again.
Good demo. You did this in the spatial domain, but you could have also done it in the frequency domain. A vertical 1xn kernel or its frequency-domain equivalent lowpass filter is also an effective mitigation tactic in post.As I described here https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65887363 , using mechanical shutter will blur the banding. For f/2.8 and assuming shutter location 4 mm in front of the sensor plane we get a diameter of light cone of 4 mm / 2.8 = approximately 1.4 mm. Therefore, blurring caused by mechanical shutter would be roughly 1.4 mm / 24 mm = 5.8% of image height and 1.4 mm / 24 mm * 2000 = 117 pixels of the original image. Hence, I simulated how the image would look if a mechanical shutter was used by applying a linear blur of 117 pixels in vertical direction. I then applied layer mask around Yngwie, so he is not completely blurry. You can see results below.
Original - Electronic shutter
Simulated mechanical shutter at f/2.8
--
https://blog.kasson.com
Last edited:
olyflyer
Veteran Member
My walkaround camera (Z7) does not have it, nor my previous walkaround cameras had it.My current favorite walkaround camera, the Q2M, has a leaf shutter.True, I missed that one, but there aren't that many around.
Pehaps one or two P&S I had many years ago had it.
olyflyer
Veteran Member
What's "hardly noticeable" is individual, and also depends on the situation. I have pictures taken with DSLRs where it is clearly noticeable and very disturbing. In my opinion, in the OP's image it is hardly noticeable and not at all disturbing. I mean, I can clearly see it in the background (because I am looking for it), but not on his face or guitar, so it is not disturbing. If it was visible on the subject, it would be disturbing even if it was taken with the mechanical shutter of DSLR.
Because of that single reason...? Really...?
Banding may happen when shooting bands. Some even wear headbands. But this banding must be due to Yngwies supernatural nature.Hi,
I've read about the risk of banding showing up in photos, but I seem to remember that this only happens at slow shutter speeds.
I'm currently editing my photos of a live concert by Swedisch guitarist Yngwie Malmsteen and noticed (what I believe to be) banding in some of my photos.
Below you see an unedited RAW photo exported from Lightroom to JPEG at a resolution of 2000 x 3000 pixels. On the photo above and around the head of the guitarist you can clearly see the banding in de red background.
Nikon Z 9 with Z 70-200mm S @ 99mm - ISO1800 - f/2.8 - 1/320s
Is there a way to prevent this from happening?
Or is there a clever way to get rid of this in post-processing?
Or is this just one of the disadvantages of a shutterless camera?
This banding looks like something that can be removed quite easily if it not seen in most of the photos.
Waiting to take my Z9 to shoot bands. I must study the High-Frequency Flicker Reduction mode before that.
--
'Anyone who believes exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist.'
Verkku
Forum Enthusiast
you wrote quite a lot about your sony overheating. Does all your cameras have problems?
vtpeters
Leading Member
How could one have prevented this with the shutterless Z9 prior to firmware 2.1, without the option to dail in the proper shutter speed to prevent this from happening? Trail and error (checking regularly @ 100% magnification?
vtpeters
Leading Member
I believe I have it set to ON, but I'll have to check this when I get home.Flicker Detection may be able to show if there are Flicker issues
--
Victor Peters
vtpeters
Leading Member
Shooting shows almost always happens at relative high ISO values, which means (relatively) more noise. Adding noise on top of that makes things even worse I'm afraid...
vtpeters
Leading Member
Hi John,
This photo was shot in Tilburg (venue '013') past Wednesday.
I have quite a few photos, but haven't had the time to fully process them (shot Kiss at 'Ziggo Dome' in Amsterdam the day after and the photos of that show had a higher priority).
Contact me via a personal message if you'd like some photos of that show.
vtpeters
Leading Member
Thanks for the information. I will check it out.
vtpeters
Leading Member
Looks good to me. Thanks for explaining and sharing.As I described here https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65887363 , using mechanical shutter will blur the banding. For f/2.8 and assuming shutter location 4 mm in front of the sensor plane we get a diameter of light cone of 4 mm / 2.8 = approximately 1.4 mm. Therefore, blurring caused by mechanical shutter would be roughly 1.4 mm / 24 mm = 5.8% of image height and 1.4 mm / 24 mm * 2000 = 117 pixels of the original image. Hence, I simulated how the image would look if a mechanical shutter was used by applying a linear blur of 117 pixels in vertical direction. I then applied layer mask around Yngwie, so he is not completely blurry. You can see results below.
Original - Electronic shutter
Simulated mechanical shutter at f/2.8
I have a question about the description of you solution...
You describe that you "assuming shutter location 4 mm in front of the sensor plane". But the Z9 has no (mechanical) shutter. The only shutter present is part of the sensor (in a way) and as such located ON the sensor plane. But I could be wrong, 'cause I am not familiar with sensor architecture apart from what Thom Hogan has described in his book on the Z9 (and I probably have to read that part of the book more thoroughly.
--
Victor Peters
Last edited:
vtpeters
Leading Member
Could you explain this further for me.Good demo. You did this in the spatial domain, but you could have also done it in the frequency domain. A vertical 1xn kernel or its frequency-domain equivalent lowpass filter is also an effective mitigation tactic in post.As I described here https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65887363 , using mechanical shutter will blur the banding. For f/2.8 and assuming shutter location 4 mm in front of the sensor plane we get a diameter of light cone of 4 mm / 2.8 = approximately 1.4 mm. Therefore, blurring caused by mechanical shutter would be roughly 1.4 mm / 24 mm = 5.8% of image height and 1.4 mm / 24 mm * 2000 = 117 pixels of the original image. Hence, I simulated how the image would look if a mechanical shutter was used by applying a linear blur of 117 pixels in vertical direction. I then applied layer mask around Yngwie, so he is not completely blurry. You can see results below.
Original - Electronic shutter
Simulated mechanical shutter at f/2.8
I'm not that well versed in using Photoshop or Lightroom.
--
Victor Peters
AlireaPhotography
Forum Enthusiast
- Messages
- 493
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 558
I don't think so. the ones I got from electronic shutter even at shutter speed 1/200 was clearly noticeable. The OPs shots are less noticeable and can be fixed but it can be much worse than that.
I can go to the topic of why this feature was very important for me and I returned Z9 for it, but it is not my thread and I don't want to change the topic. let's focus on OPs issue now.
M
MCLV
Guest
No, Z9 doesn't have mechanical shutter which would blur the banding. I was trying to simulate how the shot would have looked like if it was taken with Z7, for example. And for that purpose, I tried to estimate how much blur should I apply.Looks good to me. Thanks for explaining and sharing.As I described here https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65887363 , using mechanical shutter will blur the banding. For f/2.8 and assuming shutter location 4 mm in front of the sensor plane we get a diameter of light cone of 4 mm / 2.8 = approximately 1.4 mm. Therefore, blurring caused by mechanical shutter would be roughly 1.4 mm / 24 mm = 5.8% of image height and 1.4 mm / 24 mm * 2000 = 117 pixels of the original image. Hence, I simulated how the image would look if a mechanical shutter was used by applying a linear blur of 117 pixels in vertical direction. I then applied layer mask around Yngwie, so he is not completely blurry. You can see results below.
Original - Electronic shutter
Simulated mechanical shutter at f/2.8
I have a question about the description of you solution...
You describe that you "assuming shutter location 4 mm in front of the sensor plane". But the Z9 has no (mechanical) shutter. The only shutter present is part of the sensor (in a way) and as such located ON the sensor plane. But I could be wrong, 'cause I am not familiar with sensor architecture apart from what Thom Hogan has described in his book on the Z9 (and I probably have to read that part of the book more thoroughly.
Last edited:
I don’t think there’s any way in Ps to get a custom kernel bigger than 5x5. AFAIK, Lr doesn’t support custom kernels at all. That’s why I suggested FFT earlier.Could you explain this further for me.Good demo. You did this in the spatial domain, but you could have also done it in the frequency domain. A vertical 1xn kernel or its frequency-domain equivalent lowpass filter is also an effective mitigation tactic in post.As I described here https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65887363 , using mechanical shutter will blur the banding. For f/2.8 and assuming shutter location 4 mm in front of the sensor plane we get a diameter of light cone of 4 mm / 2.8 = approximately 1.4 mm. Therefore, blurring caused by mechanical shutter would be roughly 1.4 mm / 24 mm = 5.8% of image height and 1.4 mm / 24 mm * 2000 = 117 pixels of the original image. Hence, I simulated how the image would look if a mechanical shutter was used by applying a linear blur of 117 pixels in vertical direction. I then applied layer mask around Yngwie, so he is not completely blurry. You can see results below.
Original - Electronic shutter
Simulated mechanical shutter at f/2.8
I'm not that well versed in using Photoshop or Lightroom.
If you’d like. I can post code for doing it in Matlab.
--
the last word the last word - Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.
Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.
blog.kasson.com
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum