Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: RAW "Grain"  (Read 2733 times)
macgyver
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 510


« on: September 23, 2005, 08:43:31 PM »
ReplyReply

Alright, so, I know that people will bite my head off for a variety of things on this, but please try to keep on the question at hand.

 

I have a confession to make: I usually shoot jpeg. Yes, yes, i know. I am a heathen and shall be condemed to dante's inferno unless I change my ways. But! There is hope on the horrizon, I am trying to change.

Seriously, I've become acostumed to jpeg for a couple of reasons. First off, the 300D's buffer is painfully slow, and working in RAW when I need to keep shooting is hard-nay impossible. The big thing though is the fact that however I shoot (aperature/iso/whatever) I am never quite pleased with the results I get when I work in RAW. I assume that I am just not doing it right. So, I've decided to try to learn how to do it right, but the same problem keeps coming up evertime.

I always seem to get this sort of....grain, I cant think of a better word for it, in my RAW images that I do not see in jpeg. Doesn't matter what ISO I'm on.

An example:

(this is where ya'll will go nuts at me for a second time, the following was shot with a bad lens at 1600, in low light and handheld. try to look past that, unless of course it is why the picture sucks so badly)

This is an actuall pixels screen of the raw file after I opened it, nothing done to it in PS.



Maybe it's just me, but that is awful grainy to me. Even after noise reduction it seems to remain so.



Maybe I'm totally off here. If so please tell me, I would love to hear whatever, even if it's you telling me I'm a moron.

Also, here is the full shot (just for reference). It's nothing good, just the one I picked to ask about.



Thanks guys, I apreciate it. Also, if I need to resize any of these just tell me. Although that whole hurricane thing might mess me up for a few days...

-macgyver
Logged
61Dynamic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1442


WWW
« Reply #1 on: September 23, 2005, 09:13:23 PM »
ReplyReply

You shot it at 1600. It's going to be noisy (not grainy). This image isn't going to help us figure out your issue.

You say you are getting more noise in RAW than in JPEG. Show us a scene shot in Raw and then in Jpeg at the same ISO (say, ISO 200) so we can compare and let you know what you may be doing wrong if anything.

Also include raw converter used and its settings along with the Jpeg settings in the camera.
Logged
macgyver
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 510


« Reply #2 on: September 23, 2005, 09:28:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Thank you, I will do that.  (Figured I would need to, just went ahead and asked anyway)  But, it will be a few days, as I mentioned a hurricane is coming for me.
Logged
61Dynamic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1442


WWW
« Reply #3 on: September 23, 2005, 09:45:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Yeah, no need to get caught in a hurricane for the sake of an ISO test.

Unless of course you want to show us some very sweet hurricane pics

Good luck you you
Logged
macgyver
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 510


« Reply #4 on: September 23, 2005, 11:21:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Oh, belive me, if it gets "interesting" enough here (which it wont) I'll be outside.
Logged
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8877


« Reply #5 on: September 23, 2005, 11:58:42 PM »
ReplyReply

The first of the 3 images, a crop which admittedly shows serious noise, represents a print size at least 24"x36", by my rough estimate. Is this the print size you intend making for this image?

A lot has been said about pixel-peeping on this site, a term coined by Michael (I think) to describe excessive concern about defects visible at high magnification on the computer monitor, but virtually invisible on the print.

You should always bear this in mind. There's a 'print size' button in PS which is supposed to make the print on your monitor the same size as the dimensions you've specified. I find it hopelessly inaccurate for some reason which I don't understand. But you can always resize the image to closely approximate on your monitor the actual print size you intend making.
Logged
dot-borg
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 14


« Reply #6 on: September 24, 2005, 01:55:13 AM »
ReplyReply

I personally don't find the noise objectionable, especially since it's mostly monochromatic. In fact, I find the artifacts left by the noise removal algorithm to be much uglier.

I'll bet if you printed it or scaled it to a reasonable on-line viewing size it would look great.
Logged

Whoever said "a picture is worth a thousand words" was a cheapskate.

http://www.pbase.com/dot_borg
Dan Sroka
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 594


WWW
« Reply #7 on: September 26, 2005, 11:08:54 AM »
ReplyReply

Many cameras apply noise reduction to JPEGs but not to raw images (since you can do that in the software).
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad