weixiang1900
New Member
try not to use photobucket.. the images are horribly compressed resulting in seriously digusting artifacts... v:sweat:
Fujifilm F200EXR is a GEM
- Thread starter Daniellam
- Start date
try not to use photobucket.. the images are horribly compressed resulting in seriously digusting artifacts... v:sweat:
Thanks weixiang, what is Yours ?
weixiang1900
New Member
http://imageshack.us/
using this.. i was the TS for F200EXR sample photos.. even my ISO800 photos aren't as blotchy as yours @ ISO200... the image compression online is really terrible for photobucket...
TheChef
Senior Member
Yeah, this is true. I use Photobucket and the images are less sharp than the original. Sharp objects become blur. :angry:
You're right, when I review original photo enlarge to max size 500%, no noise is visible on the screen. Thanks for the site.
TheChef
Senior Member
As my shots (ice cream vendor) was a candid one taken manual at a split of a few sec. No time for white balance and other adjustment
Your overall bedroom pic is not even sharp in focus at full aperture F2.8. No fine details of the bedroom and small items.
Take a look at this pic from my album taken on the very night after I bought the Fuji F200EXR. Hand held also ISO 200 DR100 F3.9 @1/8 sec. One light source of 20w warm tone energy saving bulb made in China. Try matching my shot at the same level of settings.
Much better than the Ice Cream man shot. But, not as sharp as I would like leh.
Hi. My personal view. I dont find your photos any gd at least before PP. For the ice-cream photo, framing is out and not sharp. Let us know your food photos were used for which restaurant.
Sorry no names of advertiser and restaurant owners. Copyright issue.
And I think you can't see what is sharpness in a photo or a picture, and you don't even have knowledge how to judge a good pic. My son when I took up Photography you're not even in this world yet.
spheredome
New Member
For info purpose.
The resizing tool can also cause jpeg to soften a lot, especially tif to jpg. E.g Pixresizer.
When using software like Arcsoft Impression to add text and saving it, in some unknown condition can cause image to soften too.
Low contrast monitor (old model monitor, laptops) can see more noise than the high resolution ones. One suggestion is to reduce the contrast of the picture to reveal the noise but not as obvious as low contrast monitor.
For e.g in the buddha and statue photo, there is a lot of color noise around the cabinet and the ivory statue, and tall back frame on right side. Not suppose to be that prominent at iso200. *I must clarify I don't have a EXR200.
The resizing tool can also cause jpeg to soften a lot, especially tif to jpg. E.g Pixresizer.
When using software like Arcsoft Impression to add text and saving it, in some unknown condition can cause image to soften too.
Low contrast monitor (old model monitor, laptops) can see more noise than the high resolution ones. One suggestion is to reduce the contrast of the picture to reveal the noise but not as obvious as low contrast monitor.
For e.g in the buddha and statue photo, there is a lot of color noise around the cabinet and the ivory statue, and tall back frame on right side. Not suppose to be that prominent at iso200. *I must clarify I don't have a EXR200.
TheChef
Senior Member
Yeah that is true, but the colour blotches is only obvious when I increase the contrast and brightness of my monitor. Tone down the contrast and brightness and it will be more pleasing to the eyes.
spheredome
New Member
What I meant is temporary push down setting for final quality check purpose. For plain surface like blackbackground, I tilt LCD downward to check for dim grey pixel. Or extreme set the gama to reveal large area.
BTW, do you know what is the DR stated in thread means? Is it dynamic range setting?
Why I ask is because iso200 should not produce such discoloration for this range of sensor. In my LX3 Dynamic Range setting, it does produce odd colors indoor which is why I don't use it anymore.
BTW, do you know what is the DR stated in thread means? Is it dynamic range setting?
Why I ask is because iso200 should not produce such discoloration for this range of sensor. In my LX3 Dynamic Range setting, it does produce odd colors indoor which is why I don't use it anymore.
Thanks for pin pointing on the monitor issue. I have crop part of the original pic and post another of the same photo, and there seems to have less visible noise, no PP.
spheredome
New Member
Pls don't mind, I cropped a section of your pic, push gamma and contrast up a bit to show you what I see on my screen. Will delete away later.
BTW, what is the text DR means in your post?
You can see the discoloration on these area. Underexpose at iso200 will not produce such blotches. So I am suspected some kind feature being turned on which should be avoided.
I am never bothered by sharpness problem since it can be PP.
BTW, what is the text DR means in your post?
You can see the discoloration on these area. Underexpose at iso200 will not produce such blotches. So I am suspected some kind feature being turned on which should be avoided.
I am never bothered by sharpness problem since it can be PP.
No offend but age doesn't mean anything when it comes to photography at all. If not, I think all professional photographers will have to be 70 or 80 years before their works are consider excellent. And frankly, since you said u never own a dslr, I never heard a photographer using pns cameras for serious work such as photos for food menu.
Though I am not gd in photography at all, I can still judge the quality of a photo. I have doing PP works professionally for so long that I can tell what is wrong with a photo.
Last edited:
Pls don't mind, I cropped a section of your pic, push gamma and contrast up a bit to show you what I see on my screen. Will delete away later.
BTW, what is the text DR means in your post?
Sorry to inform you I beg the difference from my original pic. I did the same as what you
did. increase the brightness and white level after the re-cropped. But is so much different from your version, colour solid and no noise.
I think the lost in details and loose colour pixels are due to the compression of the jpg pic, as what Weixiang has pointed out. My Original is as good as what I expected.
.
For Your Informations I am the first food & Jewellery Photograqpher in Singapore, to use PnS camera for my Professional works and I have earn enough money to buy myself a brand new car, just one month ago during this recession period. Can you match that!
My Jewellery & food Pics taken with a PnS camera is as good as any DSLR camera.
Some of my Pics are even done on a 3.2 mega C...on camera @ less than $100 in today market. Can you do it!
What is PP works, its just simple manupilation of the Photoshop tools thats all, that was when I start to use Photoshop 15 yrs ago when the Mac classic exist.
Tachyon
Senior Member
I did a Google search and could not find your portfolio. Can you please direct me? Thanks!
(By the way, most professional photographers are not rich, they are just passionate - being able to buy a car with your photos does not prove that your photos are better.)
Hi guys, can you comment whether the unsightly blotches for the below-attached picture (produced by F31fd at ISO400) is as unsightly as andikong's pictures? I also used Photobucket to resize my photos. Thanks.
Hi, I think its due to the compression of photobucket.
I've uploaded (please scroll up) 2 test images (No PP) that was taken at ISO 400, DR 400% (100% Crops) included; of which one is severely underexposed on purpose. IMO, are surprisingly clean, with lots of detail preserved) by PnS standard. Cheers!
Last edited:
