On 3/16/2011 9:10 AM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> Just this morning I took a couple of shots of a flight of storks that
> was circling overhead. Since I had just walked outside the scene was
> unexpected and I had no camera with me except the Samsung WB650 on my
> belt. The storks obligingly circled a few times such that I was able to
> get off a couple of shots but, after downloading them to the computer, I
> was dismayed by the amount of noise in the clear blue sky at ISO 80.
> But that's what you get with a 12 MP P&S.
Hmmm. That isn't what I experience. Here's a blue sky image I took in December.
<http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/tech/WB650/SAM_0287.htm>
I thought I could see noise in the 100% sample, but if so, it sure isn't much.
About all the NeatImage does for it is to
sharpen it up a little.
In an image with shadows, absolutely, there's noise there. This was a very
difficult exposure situation. I shot to hold
the highlights, leaving most of it in shadow.
<http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/tech/WB650/SAM_0068.htm>
The original is very dark, but I did nail the highlights - just touching the
top of the histogram. Opening it in ACR, it
adjusted quite nicely to a more normal looking exposure. Reduced to web size,
there's a little visible noise, if you
look for it, but I don't think it's a problem. NeatImage nicely cleans it up,
so further processing won't enhance the
graininess.
100% is a different story before NI, with lots of visible noise, especially
after it's had the shadows raised. NI does a
nice job here.
On 3/17/2011 4:19 AM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> Yes, by a lot!
>
> On 3/16/2011 1:31 PM, John Hudson wrote:
>> Would an increase in the ISO rating from 80 to say 200 on your [mere 12MP
>> !?] p&s have generated even more noise ?
It's not THAT bad at ISO 200! It has been raining a lot. I thought when I
didn't have time Sunday that I would miss this
volunteer waterfall. It wasn't quite as impressive yesterday, but still worth
shooting.
<http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/tech/WB650/SAM_0320.htm>
As you can see, the noise isn't visible in a web size image. At 100%, it still
isn't obtrusive even in darker areas, and
NI takes care of it.
Even at ISO 400, things aren't that bad.
<http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/tech/WB650/SAM_0280.htm>
Now shadow noise is easy to see at web size. but I'll bet most
non-photographers wouldn't notice it. NI makes it
disappear at that size.
At 100%, the noise is really ugly, but NI does a good job on it. By ISO 400,
loss of fine detail and pixel level
artifacts become a greater problem for overall IQ than noise.
On 3/17/2011 8:32 AM, John Hudson wrote:
> Noise at ISO 200 ...if you enlarge to 24" x 36" perhaps.....but surely not
> for 8" x 10" or less or for web page viewing.
I hope you can judge for yourself from the above. The web size images are just
fine at ISO 80 and 200. They do need NR
to look good above that. Printed @ 300 dpi, these images would be 10x13", 12x16
@ 240 dpi.
You should certainly get an excellent 8x10, 11x14, etc. of a bright scene at
ISO 80 and a dim scene up to 200 with some
post processing.
> . . . At least in this particular case, although CS3 did reduce
> the noise somewhat, CS5 essentially eliminated it . . .
At your suggestion, I tried NR in CS5. It is indeed much better than last time
I had tried it on some earlier version.
On the other hand, some testing showed me that it's still not up to NeatImage.
NI's ability to tune by frequency is more
flexible and powerful.
NI's ability to resharpen by frequency also beats later sharpening after NR in
CS5.
> I don't know how it will work with other images but for this one it was
> excellent. Incidentally, the WB650 doesn't support raw so I was working
> with a JPEG image. Impressive!
Yup. Sometimes, I get a little frustrated at the limitations of images from it.
But really, for a tiny sensor camera
that's JPEG only, it's darn good. It certainly gets those image I would
otherwise miss at good enough IQ.
A. Windy Moose
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|