Yes, on first glance the other 1600 shots don't look nearly that bad. I
wonder if the brighter light in the background set the white balance
and/or some how increased the noise level? As the noise disappears in
the bright background. There is another shot with similar bright white
area in the background, and high noise (image 6).... actually, if you
look closer at all the 1600 shots, they are all quite noisy in certain
areas. Neat Image builds a noise profile from areas you select that are
low detail and uniform. My bet is certain shots are going to be
difficult for noise reduction to work well on, and here the noise
reduction probably keyed in on the uniform bright area and may have
actually made the noise in the other areas worse. This is why I think
comparing noise between cameras of a uniformly lit area does not tell
you much, such as done on dpreview. Comparing real scenes such as these
is a better predictor of noise. And not that Doro brings out the worst,
mind you, she is quite gorgeous, rather it is the camera and the light
working in a real world situation.
There is certainly more to a camera than pure specs.
So how long will this love-hate attraction to the E-1 go on?
And the good news is that film scanners keep getting better also.
Wayne
At 07:40 PM 10/29/2003, you wrote:
>Was it the shocking hair that caused that image to have so much noise?
>It seems like the worst picture for noise. A quick glance at the other
>pictures showed some high ISO pictures that didn't appear as bad (IMHO).
>The noise really detracted from Doro's photo even at low magnification.
>I suppose something could have happened with the color balance to make
>it look worse.
>
>-jeff
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|