intense banding in some SD1 photos

[mike earussi]

I have a question for those of you who either own an SD1 or have had a chance to work with one, in many photos I see really bad banding in the smooth out of focus areas such as the one posted below. Is this a common problem with the SD1 or just really bad processing or severe underexposure? And have any of you had this problem? In my on going debate whether to buy an SD1 this is my main concern, as a lot of my images have this kind of background and banding like this would ruin every single one of them. I can't help but feel that Sigma, in order to play the megapixel race, compromised IQ in exchange--not a good decision IMO.

 

[FDecker]

I assume you mean the banding on the left-handed side of the picture at the border of that green something?

This is something I have never seen in my SD1 pictures.

I sometimes see a bit of banding in high Iso pictures. But this is more looking like noise banding. Far from what you show here.

Regards, Frank

 

[mike earussi]

I assume you mean the banding on the left-handed side of the picture at the border of that green something?

This is something I have never seen in my SD1 pictures.

I sometimes see a bit of banding in high Iso pictures. But this is more looking like noise banding. Far from what you show here.

Regards, Frank

Again, don't know what's causing it but I've seen it on many of the Sigma Japan samples.

 

[short243]

Again, don't know what's causing it but I've seen it on many of the Sigma Japan samples.

Hi, I was wondering if it has anything to do with old verse new images. Wasn't much interrested but remember seeing some complaints the preMerrill images having problems.
--
Rick Wilkinson
From Gobblers Knob ...... De Colores

If they can't kill you for it, it doesn't matter ....
Karen Schmidt

http://www.pbase.com/short243

 

[larryj]

Hi Mike:

I did not see anything like that in the several hundred photos I took with Kendall's SD1 last month. Check out a few on my Flickr site, mostly shot in good sunlight (I am a fair weather photographer, by choice).
http://www.flickr.com/photos/23482396@N05/sets/72157629072908942/
--
Cheers,
larryj

If you can see the light, you can photograph it
Quote from Myron Woods

 

[cinefeel]

Let me assure you that this is NOT normal SD1 behavior and there is nothing to worry about.

This only occurs on very severe underexposure at ISO 800+, most likely only 1600+ in my experience.

It may also result from ridiculous processing methods. Some of the pre-merril samples were processed very badly, not to mention with early hardware/firmware/software, so you may have seen this kind of thing there to some extent.

In normal use, you won't get anything like this with the SD1... have no fear.

 

[rick decker]

Hi Rick:

The M and pre-M cameras are the same so there will be no difference all things equal. Sigmachrome had a shot with banding. I have seen it in the sky and in images where there is underexosure. All Sigma cameras have shown banding as have many non-Sigma cameras. Most likely is underexposure of shadow or darker areas and with photos that have large dynamic range. It is probably nose. I have some shots of the moon with SD10, SD14 and SD1 and all show banding in the dark areas.

Processing/enhancing images can cause the banding to become more obvious, especially working with contrast and expsoure.

I am sure Sigma is aware of this as it is nothing new.
--
http://www.lightreflection.com
http://www.silveroaksranch.com
http://www.pbase.com/rickdecker

 

[cinefeel]

Certainly, the noise characteristics of the SD1 is much better in shadow areas than earlier Sigmas, in my experience.

Might be a useful point of comparison.

 

[guzzibreva1]

HPerhaps a bit of under exposure in combination with tungsten light with large white balance offset needed?

There are about 3000 SD1 images here and I don't see any banding.

http://www.flickriver.com/photos/tags/sigma%2Bsd1/interesting/

 

[WHNewell]

Mike,

It looks as if you may have either purshed the limits of exposure & fill light or both in SPP as there is noise throughout the frame with the exception of the artwork. This is common due to the DNR of the image where the shadow areas are pushed to see more detail only to increase noise and the banding is also a result of that.

Rick Decker is 100% correct in his analysis of this issue.
--



http://www.pbase.com/wally_newell

Wally

 

[rick decker]

I would say that as a rule it is...It really all comes down to exposure of the shadows.

someone suggested pushing contrast back and minimizing fill light and the PPing in an editor. I have tried a this a few times and it seems to help.

R
--
http://www.lightreflection.com
http://www.silveroaksranch.com
http://www.pbase.com/rickdecker

 

[mike earussi]

Mike,

It looks as if you may have either purshed the limits of exposure & fill light or both in SPP as there is noise throughout the frame with the exception of the artwork. This is common due to the DNR of the image where the shadow areas are pushed to see more detail only to increase noise and the banding is also a result of that.

Rick Decker is 100% correct in his analysis of this issue.
--



http://www.pbase.com/wally_newell

Wally

It's not my shot, just one I pulled off of Sigma Japan's site. I haven't altered it at all. And I'm glad no one here seems to have this as a problem. But whoever is doing the processing for Japan's web site has a PP technique that's generating a lot of images that look like this. That was why I was concerned (and since this seems to be uncommon Sigma should really pull all those shots with noise banding off).

 

[Rawmeister]

I had banding on the very first job that I used my SD1M on.
This was an interior shot of a large area at ISO 400.

An area close to the edge of the frame was further away and din't get full illumination from the flash.
During raw conversion I did use some fill light to bring up that area.
If I remember right it was around +4.

The result after the conversion was really horrific banding along with a ton of luminance noise. I smoothed out the liminance noise with third party noise software but the banding remained unfixable.

Lucky I shot the rest of the job with no flash and ISO 100 and never saw the prob in those shots.
Decided to only use 100 and 200 ISO since then.

 

[brittonx]

I have a question for those of you who either own an SD1 or have had a chance to work with one, in many photos I see really bad banding in the smooth out of focus areas such as the one posted below. Is this a common problem with the SD1 or just really bad processing or severe underexposure? And have any of you had this problem? In my on going debate whether to buy an SD1 this is my main concern, as a lot of my images have this kind of background and banding like this would ruin every single one of them. I can't help but feel that Sigma, in order to play the megapixel race, compromised IQ in exchange--not a good decision IMO.

As others have indicated, if under-exposed, and especially if pushed with fill light, the banding can appear.

It does not appear in properly exposed images.
--
--Britton
http://photo.brittonrobbins.com/

 

[Rawmeister]

Yes, but the likely hood is very much affected by ISO.
400 and over and your really inviting the prob to rear its head.
I've figured out the best way to using the SD1/SD1M.
It's....Tripod, ISO 100, and be there. lol.

 

[jbr]

I have not seen this type of banding and i don't see noise banding in sky areas in my SD1M normally processed images. However, I am seeing minor vertical noise banding in sky areas when the sky/clouds are too bright and it is desirable to darken and boost contrast a fair bit. I have seen the same noise in the sample SD1 images on the sigma web site. This never occurred with my SD14. It seems to me that if you want to create some dramatic skys that this banding noise may show up. It would be interesting to see is all cameras exhibit the same characteristic.

Joe

 

[Craig Philips]

many fine images in this flickr series. Well worth a look, particularly if you have any interest in Japan.

http://www.flickriver.com/photos/tags/sigma%2Bsd1/interesting/

 

[Rodrigo Cunha]

Heck.... this is an ISO-100 image! I would say something is broken with your camera. Besides high noise (what the heck!) probably there is something wrong in your sensor, some areas are more sensitive than others due to manufacturing errors and it translates into banding.

Check it with Sigma!

 

[Basalite]

HPerhaps a bit of under exposure in combination with tungsten light with large white balance offset needed?

There are about 3000 SD1 images here and I don't see any banding.

http://www.flickriver.com/photos/tags/sigma%2Bsd1/interesting/

Take the second picture and download full size version. Darken the sky a little bit further and you can clearly see banding, especially if you sharpen a bit more. Look in the lower left part of the image, it's easiest to see there. The banding is in the same direction or always runs up and down in landscape and across in portrait.

I was going to buy the SD1 until I noticed it. Some people may say you'll only notice it in big prints and while viewing at 100% and my response is who buys such a camera if not expecting to do those things. It's depressing as I had already made up my mind about buying the SD1 until I noticed the banding.

 

[Basalite]

Hi Mike:

I did not see anything like that in the several hundred photos I took with Kendall's SD1 last month. Check out a few on my Flickr site, mostly shot in good sunlight (I am a fair weather photographer, by choice).
http://www.flickr.com/photos/23482396@N05/sets/72157629072908942/
--
Cheers,
larryj

If you can see the light, you can photograph it
Quote from Myron Woods

Most of your pictures are reduced in size and obviously jpgs. The fact that they are jpgs will ruin smooth tones areas like skies. The reduction in size will also make it impossible to see.

I found one image "Balance Rock 2" offering a full size version and I downloaded it. I darkened the sky, as the banding is noticed most when smooth toned areas are darkened, and sure enough the jpg compression has destroyed any detail you would normally see in an uncompressed image.

The banding is there and I found it just before getting ready to purchase the camera. That banding will be an issue in large prints as it is fairly obvious in dark smooth toned areas.