Advertisements
Aquatic Avenue Banner Tropica Shop Banner Fishy Business Banner
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 24

Thread: ASA1000 picture too grainy?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Beauty World
    Posts
    7,114
    Feedback Score
    0
    Images
    789
    Country
    Singapore

    ASA1000 picture too grainy?

    Advertisements
    Fresh n Marine aQuarium Banner

    Advertise here

    Advertise here

    The above picture is taken at ASA1000 setting and using flash. Uncropped but sized down for posting to 600 X 400 pixels.

    Do you guys think it's too grainy?

    Cheers,
    I have dwarf cichlids in my tanks! Do you?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    58
    Feedback Score
    0
    Country
    Singapore
    I find it's fine. May I know wat is your settings?

    -FND->

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Woodlands
    Posts
    3,938
    Feedback Score
    0
    Images
    54
    Country
    Singapore
    Looks really good!
    But, since you sized down to 600x400, it could have remove the grainy look.
    Try to take one in 640x480 or smaller at the same settings and see how it compares.
    koah fong
    Juggler's tanks

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    375
    Feedback Score
    0
    Country
    Singapore
    Computer screen can only show up to the maximum of 72dpi. DPI stands for dots per inch. That's the amount of datas that will be able to show on our monitor screen. More information will not be shown and it's consider "redundant" datas. Too little < 72 dpi, software will interpolate those missing information, ie, it get an average of what's there to fill up those empty one.

    I would say computer screen is not a good way to judge its image quality, since it requires the least picture information of all media.

    So if you will to use it for screen display purpose, I would say your picture look good. The graininess is not that perceptible for the untrained eye.

    To make a good comparison, you may consider printing it out at its orignal size, and you'll see the difference. You should be able to see those "grains" in print. If not, take another image of ISO 100, and make a comparison of it. Another easier way is to zoom in using an image editing software, and see the details. Graininess will be magnified.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Singapore, tpy
    Posts
    304
    Feedback Score
    0
    the picture looks good

    dont have to be so concerned with this noise thing unless you want to make prints.
    and anyway for digital images can always use programs like Neatimage if you really want a "clean" picture.
    To each her own fish !
    petfrd

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Bukit Merah
    Posts
    1,376
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Images
    41
    Country
    Singapore
    the picture looks good

    dont have to be so concerned with this noise thing unless you want to make prints.
    and anyway for digital images can always use programs like Neatimage if you really want a "clean" picture.

  7. #7
    May I reiterate that the picture looks good?

    Anyway, where to get this neatimage thing? Never heard about it before.
    Visit Spilopterus' Tank
    Fish of Fury

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Tampines, Singapore.
    Posts
    7,920
    Feedback Score
    0
    Images
    7
    Country
    Singapore
    can't tell at this resolution benny, you need to put up the big pic but shouldn't think it would be a problem for the D60 CCD. On my G5 at low light it may be a problem (that's why I'm taking in RAW mode).

    any photoshop enhancements done?

    btw, great pic as usual.
    why I don't do garden hybrids and aquarium strains: natural species is a history of Nature, while hybrids are just the whims of Man.
    hexazona · crumenatum · Galleria Botanica

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    375
    Feedback Score
    0
    Country
    Singapore
    The graininess will show up at the most obvious area where high contrast is. That means the highlight where bright color is, against another very dark area. That's also the psychological colors where bright color becomes extremely perceptible and virtually move forward.

    For this image, take a look at the background. The light green color against the dark gray. Look around that area, see those grains that I perceived? However, it's still not that grainy for that given detail, and definitely looks good as mentioned earlier.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Tampines, Singapore.
    Posts
    7,920
    Feedback Score
    0
    Images
    7
    Country
    Singapore
    ----------------
    On 9/20/2003 3:43:59 PM

    For this image, take a look at the background. The light green color against the dark gray. Look around that area, see those grains that I perceived? However, it's still not that grainy for that given detail, and definitely looks good as I mentioned earlier.

    ----------------
    those look more like bokeh than grainess to me
    why I don't do garden hybrids and aquarium strains: natural species is a history of Nature, while hybrids are just the whims of Man.
    hexazona · crumenatum · Galleria Botanica

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Redhill
    Posts
    2,086
    Feedback Score
    0
    Country
    Singapore
    what is bokeh? (boleh okeh?)

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Tampines, Singapore.
    Posts
    7,920
    Feedback Score
    0
    Images
    7
    Country
    Singapore
    sorry chris, was trying to use some bombastic jargon seeing that I have to justify being "promoted" to moderator and not knowing a whole lot about photography [] [:]

    Basically bokeh (as I understands it) refers to the quality of the blurring of an out-of-focus subject or background. so good bokeh is a pleasing smooth blend of blurriness while poor bokeh has the blurriness brokened into little light rings or flares.

    try and find some pics to illustrate what I mean…
    why I don't do garden hybrids and aquarium strains: natural species is a history of Nature, while hybrids are just the whims of Man.
    hexazona · crumenatum · Galleria Botanica

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Tampines, Singapore.
    Posts
    7,920
    Feedback Score
    0
    Images
    7
    Country
    Singapore
    here a nice short article of what Bokeh is.

    here is an interesting interative demo of bokehs generated by different lens geometry.

    here you have a list of lenses and their bokeh charateristics.
    why I don't do garden hybrids and aquarium strains: natural species is a history of Nature, while hybrids are just the whims of Man.
    hexazona · crumenatum · Galleria Botanica

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    375
    Feedback Score
    0
    Country
    Singapore
    ----------------
    On 9/20/2003 5:13:56 PM

    those look more like (good) bokeh than grainess to me
    ----------------
    Not that rough for good bokeh.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Bukit Merah
    Posts
    1,376
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Images
    41
    Country
    Singapore
    if there are grains, they will show up most prominently in places of highlight (eg skys) and also shadows. FOr this pic the first place i looked at is the dark space right above the fossil wood, where "noise" is non existent

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    375
    Feedback Score
    0
    Country
    Singapore
    That's strange. That's where I see those noise, as stated previously. Maybe try zooming in to see?

    Anyway, doesn't really matter, not that easy to tell. I think depending on what Benny wants in his end result, then he's in the best position to decide and experiment further.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Tampines, Singapore.
    Posts
    7,920
    Feedback Score
    0
    Images
    7
    Country
    Singapore
    if you're zooming beyond 100% than those would be extrapolation noise. Noise should be checked at standard resolution i.e. 100%. Maybe ask Benny to provide the full res image.
    why I don't do garden hybrids and aquarium strains: natural species is a history of Nature, while hybrids are just the whims of Man.
    hexazona · crumenatum · Galleria Botanica

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    375
    Feedback Score
    0
    Country
    Singapore
    hwchoy, actually zooming in beyond 100% does not make the computer give you extra noise for an image. What is there will be displayed in magnification. Unless you increase the dpi or size of the image, then extra noises will be added according to software algorithm.

    Zooming in is an easier way to check for image quality if we really want to know how's a particular camera or setting performance. Read www.dpreview.com? Or other photographic website? Many of their comparison/reviews of photo quality are based on image displaying at a specified magnification.

    This is basically the same as using a magnifying glass to see a photo print for any quality test. We see what is clearly there. That's also how people compare the cameras CCD technology, to put it simply.

    For this image, 100% you can still see some noise, but not that clear. Viewing somewhere around 150%, you'll see things clearer. Usually good quality image will have a smoother and gradual color transition, and not that coarse. Then I would suggest Benny to take another photo at ISO100, then make the same comparison.

    It would be better not to do any compression and image at RAW setting. No compression better since the comparison will be highly accurate. This goes to the same for anyone online whom like to test out their camera quality.

    I usually test it out with several of my friends with different brands of digital camera, to find out how's that particular brand quality.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Tampines, Singapore.
    Posts
    7,920
    Feedback Score
    0
    Images
    7
    Country
    Singapore
    actually it depends on the view you're using. once you zoom beyond 100% most viewer will do extrapolation rather than show pixellation. in any case for odd zooming percentages there will always be extrapolation errors since it cannot even show you the expanded pixel "as is".

    No doubt zooming beyond 100% allows better viewing of any artifacts, but more would have been added by the display algorithm. In any case Benny's pic was already resized so it wouldn't be a very good source for discussing "noise at ISO100", let's get him to post the full-res JPEG.

    RAW mode uses lossless compression so it is not compression per se that is undesirable but rather "lossy" compression. The G5 RAW mode produces images of approximately 4-5MB which clearly is compressed since 5 Mpx requires about 15MB if uncompressed. But the point being that no information is lost during compression. I didn't like the JPEG produced by the G5 under some situation, that's why I'm using RAW because I the JPEG produced by off-cam RAW processing has better quality (4MB vs 1.5MB).
    why I don't do garden hybrids and aquarium strains: natural species is a history of Nature, while hybrids are just the whims of Man.
    hexazona · crumenatum · Galleria Botanica

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    375
    Feedback Score
    0
    Country
    Singapore
    Yes, to certain extent, it's right to say there might be some errors at odd zooming percentages. But I can safely say that the error is too negligible to be detected by our eyes. At least I can say for Photoshop.

    200% zoom will display one pixel to become 4 same pixels. Less than that in odd, it would alternate, and 1 pixel difference is difficult to tell. There will not be extra noise added, just the choice of which pixel to put or duplicate.

    If it's inaccurate to judge a display in magnification, then I'll be in great trouble. I've too many works that depends on such magnification function to produce. Some can be meant for very high quality printing. Without this accuracy, I will make too many errors and it would be very tough to complete those projects.

    BTW, I'm not sure whether individual monitor plays a role? I'm using a 21 inch Sony monitor meant for professional artist. Quite sharp for its display to see those flaws and details.

    So you finally bought G5? Wow! Thought you going for G4...[] Yep, any lossless compression like TIFF or RAW, are best for quality evaluation. This is because one can omit the factor due to the loss of data compression.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •