grass noise / fluorescing

[rogertb]

Hi chaps - well i've had my G9 a month or so now and am pretty happy, not had much time to use it as yet but with a holiday coming up (and a new underwater housing) am looking forward to getting some good images. I generally shoot in RAW and I'm still working on getting good results using DNG converter and Camera Raw - now to the point of the post. I am really disappointed with the way the camera (in Auto / jpg mode) treats foliage and especially grass - really noisy or fluorescing (or both) see attached. I had an ixus 800is which was far better ! I s there anything to do to improve things in 'auto' ? as I said , generally, I'll be shooting in RAW Av but now and then I'll switch to auto for some happy snaps. Best Roger

[sdommin]

I'm don't see what the problem is - could you be more specific? There's no noise in the foreground grass, just blades of grass that the lens is resolving like it should.

Anyway, for fast, casual shooting, try the Program mode instead of Auto. Or even better, use AV with JPG.

[GordonSBuck]

Perhaps reduced saturation would be more to your tastes?

[rogertb]

Thanks for getting back sdommin - but when I open up a shot like this it seems the grass is so nastily "sparkly" - I'm not sure how else to describe it - it looks too "processed" and "false" - maybe it's me. Regards Roger

[rogertb]

Thanks Gordon - can I reduce saturation in "auto" ?

[Bob_A]

Perhaps reduced saturation would be more to your tastes?

And try reducing contrast a bit. In ACR I reduce the default contrast setting from 25 to 15 as a starting point for all of my G9 images.

[Kevan_G9]

I second the ACR solution. That photo has deep shade as well as the bright field of grass and I sense the camera was compensating.

[rogertb]

Thanks chaps - I have no doubt you're right I just think the on-board tweaking is a little on the heavy side and wondered if there was any way to adjust the auto settings so that that the auto jpgs are more acceptable. Thanks for taking the time - Roger

[GordonSBuck]

Thanks Gordon - can I reduce saturation in "auto" ?

Sorry, but no. However, "Program" mode is nearly the same as full auto in many respects but offers additional features including adjustments to saturation. So you could customize "P" mode -- just remember that Auto is not changed.

[Maljunulo]

I am still confused by your use of the word "fluorescing." I don't think grass fluoresces, nor do I see any in the photos. Can you enlighten me?

[Bob_A]

I am still confused by your use of the word "fluorescing." I don't think grass fluoresces, nor do I see any in the photos. Can you enlighten me?

I think the OP was just referring to the G9 images creating overly vivid colors making the scene look unnatural (and it does make grass look a bit weird). This is pretty typical for most point and shoot cameras. Consumers tend to like saturation and contrast pumped up, so the manufacturers give them what they want, even if it doesn't truly represent the scene.

Film manufacturers have been doing this for years ... remember Kodachrome? :)

[t_andersen]

I wonder whether the effect that Roger has in mind is the apparent lack of resolution in the grass. My suspicion is that the jpg compressor has a hard time coping with all the many fine details in the grass and ends up making it look grainy? That could also explain why you don't have the problem when shooting raw. Check your compressor setting.

[rogertb]

Thanks to one and all for the responses. Yes t-anderson you've summed it up so as I think we've established 'auto' is not the way to go as there seems to be no way of adjusting that grainy brightness. I'll check the settings in 'p' and set up a custom setting to use instead of 'auto' as I mentioned in my original post though my old ixus 800 didn't display grass quite this badly in auto, so I'm surprised that canon have seen fit to add that extra 'punch' in what is sold as a semi pro camera. Again, as I said, I shoot almost always in raw (which I couldn't do with the ixus) so not a big deal. Thanks again for your time. Roger

[t_andersen]

Maybe I wasn't quite clear. What I meant was that the "grains" in the grass are not pixel noise but come from the jpg-compressor that has a harder time coping with fine grass details than, say, a portrait, and I suspect that you may have had the compression set to "normal" and not "super fine", and possibly low resolution. Maybe you can try to take another pic of grass with "super fine" and a resolution of 3000x4000.

[Bob_A]

Thanks to one and all for the responses. Yes t-anderson you've summed it up so as I think we've established 'auto' is not the way to go as there seems to be no way of adjusting that grainy brightness. I'll check the settings in 'p' and set up a custom setting to use instead of 'auto' as I mentioned in my original post though my old ixus 800 didn't display grass quite this badly in auto, so I'm surprised that canon have seen fit to add that extra 'punch' in what is sold as a semi pro camera. Again, as I said, I shoot almost always in raw (which I couldn't do with the ixus) so not a big deal. Thanks again for your time. Roger

I've never heard the G9 sold as a semi-pro camera. Even the XT (XXXD) DSLR's are not considered to be semi-pro. The G9 is a high end consumer P&S camera, but that's not to say that it's not capable and can't be used by pro's ... it's just a classification. :)

Semi-pro is the XXD line of DSLR's, with the XD line being their pro cameras.