Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
Thread started 26 Feb 2017 (Sunday) 17:47
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Noise???

 
Damo77
Goldmember
Avatar
4,633 posts
Likes: 92
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
Feb 26, 2017 21:27 |  #16

Merlin_AZ wrote in post #18286177 (external link)
I resized the crop to 20x30 at 240px to print.

This is the problem. You must NEVER resize or crop during editing.
Only crop/resize after all editing is done, and you're actually saving a print file.


Damien
Website (external link) | Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Damo77
Goldmember
Avatar
4,633 posts
Likes: 92
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
Feb 26, 2017 21:28 |  #17

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18286152 (external link)
.

Yes there is.

If we see the whole photo, we then have a good idea of just how bad the noise will be at a given output size. Without the entire image and without knowing the desired final output, it is impossible to know whether the noise will be a problem or not, and if so, just how much of a problem it will be. .

No. Only a 100% crop can tell us those things. The whole image is irrelevant.


Damien
Website (external link) | Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
13,569 posts
Gallery: 146 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3766
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
     
Feb 26, 2017 21:42 |  #18

.

Damo77 wrote in post #18286237 (external link)
No. Only a 100% crop can tell us those things. The whole image is irrelevant.

.
No, you are wrong, Damien.

We do need the info about the crop and the final size.

If I am going to print a photo at 4 inches by 6 inches, then the viewer will need to know that information in order to know whether the noise that is shown will be a problem (viewable) or not when printed.

We also need to know if the image that is shown to us is the entire image to be printed, or whether it is just a small portion of what will be printed. If someone shows a deep crop, but doesn't tell us if it is a deep crop or not, then there is no way to know exactly what the noise will look like when printed at any given size.

.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Damo77
Goldmember
Avatar
4,633 posts
Likes: 92
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
Feb 26, 2017 21:44 |  #19

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18286245 (external link)
.

.
If I am going to print a photo at 4 inches by 6 inches, then the viewer will need to know that information in order to know whether the noise that is shown will be a problem (viewable) or not when printed.
.

No, that's completely irrelevant. Noise must be removed from the full-sized master file, as part of the normal editing process. To wait until output stage is a grave mistake.

https://www.damiensymo​nds.net …07/raw-noise-removal.html (external link)

https://www.damiensymo​nds.net …d-sharpening-leap-of.html (external link)


Damien
Website (external link) | Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
13,569 posts
Gallery: 146 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3766
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
     
Feb 26, 2017 21:50 |  #20

Damo77 wrote in post #18286248 (external link)
No, that's completely irrelevant. Noise must be removed from the full-sized master file, as part of the normal editing process. To wait until output stage is a grave mistake.

Right, of course - but what I said has nothing to do with when noise is removed. I actually never said anything at all about removing noise, when it should be done, how it should be done, or if it should be done.

In other words, your response to me, quoted above, is a classic example of a non-sequitur response.

The only statements I made were regarding what sample sizes need to be shown when someone is asking if the noise in their image will be a problem when they print it.

.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Merlin_AZ
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
869 posts
Likes: 17
Joined Mar 2010
     
Feb 26, 2017 21:58 |  #21

Damo77 wrote in post #18286235 (external link)
This is the problem. You must NEVER resize or crop during editing.
Only crop/resize after all editing is done, and you're actually saving a print file.

I typically crop to the print size during my PP.
What's the best way to do it if it's a problem during PP?
I don't see a way to choose that during the saving process.
I do it inside the image > image size... dialog while I'm working on it since there might be other things going on that are important based on the crop.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Damo77
Goldmember
Avatar
4,633 posts
Likes: 92
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
Feb 26, 2017 22:44 |  #22

Merlin_AZ wrote in post #18286264 (external link)
I typically crop to the print size during my PP.
What's the best way to do it if it's a problem during PP?
I don't see a way to choose that during the saving process.
I do it inside the image > image size... dialog while I'm working on it since there might be other things going on that are important based on the crop.

https://www.damiensymo​nds.net …02/trash-those-jpegs.html (external link)


Damien
Website (external link) | Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Damo77
Goldmember
Avatar
4,633 posts
Likes: 92
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
Feb 26, 2017 22:47 |  #23

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18286254 (external link)
The only statements I made were regarding what sample sizes need to be shown when someone is asking if the noise in their image will be a problem when they print it.

Yes, but that's the point. Noise is ALWAYS a problem in print, regardless of size. And it's impossible to always know, when you begin editing a photo, what size you will print it. Sometimes it's possible to know, but not always.

Noise must be removed during editing of the master file. And to do that, you must view at 100%. There is no other way.

So when we, as forum members, wish to help somebody else with their noise issue, they must show it to us at 100% as well. No other view has any relevance.


Damien
Website (external link) | Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
13,569 posts
Gallery: 146 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3766
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
Post edited over 2 years ago by Tom Reichner.
     
Feb 26, 2017 23:29 |  #24

Damo77 wrote in post #18286292 (external link)
Noise is ALWAYS a problem in print, regardless of size.

That statement is simply not true.

The vast majority of images that people print are at very small sizes, and noise is not a problem whatsoever with 99% of these small prints.

Furthermore, even at large print sizes, noise is often not a problem at all. By "not a problem", I mean it is not visible - you can't even see it. This is true for many of the prints that people have made, even when they do not use any noise reduction at all. If you cannot see any noise at 100%, then how could it be a problem when the image is printed? It can't be.

.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Damo77
Goldmember
Avatar
4,633 posts
Likes: 92
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
Feb 27, 2017 00:21 |  #25

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18286308 (external link)
The vast majority of images that people print are at very small sizes, and noise is not a problem whatsoever with 99% of these small prints.

Just because you, or they, don't know any better, doesn't mean it's not true. You would be GOBSMACKED at how good your prints can be.

Please let's leave the "I've never seen it, so it can't possibly be true" arguments to athiests.


Damien
Website (external link) | Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kirkt
Cream of the Crop
5,818 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 633
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Philadelphia, PA USA
Post edited over 2 years ago by kirkt. (2 edits in all)
     
Feb 27, 2017 07:29 |  #26

This structured artifact looks like JPEG compression applied to noise. The artifact shows up more apparently in areas of the image that are relatively uniform with little detail - the artifact occurs because the JPEG compression is trying to quantize and represent the noise in the image that it sees as fine "detail" against a uniform surface or area of the image.

I think there are some noise removal filters/applications that may have controls to eliminate JPEG artifact. In the future, when shooting at high ISO or low-light situations, consider shooting raw (or raw+JPEG) and enabling in-camera noise reduction to give the JPEG file some NR prior to compression. Working with the raw file will permit you to remove noise prior to generating the RGB image, so you can potentially achieve a better balance of NR and detail in the image prior to compression for output.

In terms of output, make a test print of some of the affected areas at the final output size/resolution and see if the artifact is noticeable for the output size and intended viewing distance.

Kirk


Kirk
---
images: http://kirkt.smugmug.c​om (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DagoImaging
Goldmember
Avatar
1,924 posts
Gallery: 20 photos
Likes: 1177
Joined Nov 2012
     
Feb 27, 2017 07:49 |  #27

Don't print it on metal, print it on canvas and the noise will be a non issue.


Sony a6300/ 16-70/4 / 70-200/4 G / Sony HVL-60M
https://designcostello​.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
36,439 posts
Gallery: 108 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5551
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Feb 27, 2017 09:33 |  #28

Could you share the jpg file, at least crop from the waist down with no resizing and save at the highest jpg setting you can to a new file and share that? No post processing other than what the Sony did for you OOC, which is probably destructive enough at this point.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock
For Sale: Ladies Thirty-One Camera Sling

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
goatruckus
Member
45 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 57
Joined Sep 2011
Location: Chapel Hill, North Carolina
     
Feb 27, 2017 10:48 as a reply to  @ TeamSpeed's post |  #29

Sony JPEG noise looks much different from Canon JPEG noise. Sony has a sort of mosaic look (hard to describe) while Canon has a more natural looking even grain. I also thought it was strange when I switched from a T2i to an A6300. It doesn't really make a difference unless you zoom in 70% or more...or crop too much.

I now shoot the Sony in RAW only which has a more even looking grain. The Sony RAW's are really great to work with compared to my T2i, particularly with Highlight recovery in Capture One.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
36,439 posts
Gallery: 108 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5551
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Feb 27, 2017 10:53 |  #30

Yes, even in the Canon camp, there are different in camera JPG engines, the newer models' generators are much nicer.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock
For Sale: Ladies Thirty-One Camera Sling

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

8,653 views & 46 likes for this thread
Noise???
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Car147
1094 guests, 204 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.