Pixel Peeping

Can anyone tell me about the dark art of pixel peeping? I know pixel peepers zoom right in, but what exactly are they looking for when they get there?

When I zoom right in on my own pictures or ones taken by others, I end up with regular small squares of all the same size but different colours - not quite sure what I'm then looking for?

They hate cameras that don't have clean 6400, but ironically don't shoot over 800, anyhow.

Anything that will upset them. They are all masochists at heart.

SAB_Click wrote in post #8779894
. . . not quite sure what I'm then looking for?

Well done, you've perfected the pixel-peeping technique already!

Seriously though, pixel-peeping is zooming into an image as close as possible (for example, 100% view) in an attempt to detect flaws that aren't noticeable when the photograph is viewed from an appropriate distance.

Think of sitting in front of the television with your nose right up against the screen, then complaining about the quality of the TV programmes.

SAB_Click wrote in post #8779894
Can anyone tell me about the dark art of pixel peeping? I know pixel peepers zoom right in, but what exactly are they looking for when they get there?

When I zoom right in on my own pictures or ones taken by others, I end up with regular small squares of all the same size but different colours - not quite sure what I'm then looking for?

To make pixel peeping useful (and I do not subscribe to the notion that all pixel peeping is bad) you need to have a reference.

Bad: Zooming to 100% views and agonizing over every little blip of noise and smear of detail despite the fact that the image will not be printed.

Good: Making prints of your images and then comparing how they look in print with how they look at 100% views. Over time you will develop a sense for how good a 100% view on monitor needs to look to support various print sizes.

Many dedicated pixel peepers are shocked when they start making prints at how much noise can be tolerated.

I pixel peep any shot that I plan to print at 8x10 or larger and I have a very good sense of what I will and will not find OK in print based on a 100% view on the monitor.

Well, pixel peeping is not inherently wrong, but you should do it in private and be sure to wash your hands afterwards.

I heard every time you do it, God kills a kitten, or a fairy dies or something.

Assessing an image while pixel peeping or via 100% crop, is like assessing 5sq cms of the Mona Lisa or listening to two bars of Ode to Joy..

Pixel peeping is for squares.

i don't know what they're looking for. Noise, "softness", microscopic banding...

Most don't realize that 100% is like looking at a wall sized print from inches away. It's not a realistic representation of how it actually looks.

It's the opposite of looking at the image on your LCD and telling yourself its in focus and will make a 24"x36" print.......LOL

Funny stuff, but Jeffrey did give you some good information.

It sounds like you were doing something strange, like zooming in to a shot at 1000% or something. I'm looking at a shot that in Lightroom is zoomed in at 11:1 and it has a whole bunch of little squares (pixels) but that's not, as far as I know, what is referred to as pixel peeping. Zooming in at a very large magnification such as this is typically for very fine pixel editing, like maybe refining a selection in Photoshop with a lot of fine detail. Outside of that it's pretty useless because it tells you nothing about the image.

What is normally referred to as "pixel peeping" happens when you view an image at 100% (in Lightroom) or Actual Pixels in Photoshop, or whatever term your software uses to map image pixels 1:1 with your monitor display pixels.

The most common reasons for doing this are:

• To evaluate critical detail in an image
  
• To evaluate noise in an image
  
• To apply sharpening and noise reduction and see the actual results on the image without compression
  
• To evaluate a lens for sharpness across the range of apertures and focal lengths
  
• To evaluate a camera for noise characteristics
  
• To evaluate a camera for lens/sensor performance in resolving fine detail
  
• To assess how appropriate an image will be for a large print, a high quality publication, a close crop, or a stock agency
  

tonylong wrote in post #8788518
What is normally referred to as "pixel peeping" happens when you view an image at 100% (in Lightroom) or Actual Pixels in Photoshop, or whatever term your software uses to map image pixels 1:1 with your monitor display pixels.

The most common reasons for doing this are:

• To evaluate critical detail in an image
  
• To evaluate noise in an image
  
• To apply sharpening and noise reduction and see the actual results on the image without compression
  
• To evaluate a lens for sharpness across the range of apertures and focal lengths
  
• To evaluate a camera for noise characteristics
  
• To evaluate a camera for lens/sensor performance in resolving fine detail
  
• To assess how appropriate an image will be for a large print, a high quality publication, a close crop, or a stock agency
  

exactly why i do it.

yogestee wrote in post #8781252
Assessing an image while pixel peeping or via 100% crop, is like assessing 5sq cms of the Mona Lisa or listening to two bars of Ode to Joy..

A perfect analogy.

PMCphotography wrote in post #8788271
Most don't realize that 100% is like looking at a wall sized print from inches away. It's not a realistic representation of how it actually looks.

Maybe an example would work.

I shot this at ISO2500 and I underexposed (whoops!) about 1/3 stop. To make it worse the lights of course cast a horrible shadow under the hat so I had to push that shadow even more. The kid's mother wants an 8x10, but I have to make sure the image will look OK. I do that by looking at a 100% view like the second image.

So here is where rational pixel peeping and the OCD crowd part ways. Look at the 100% crop. The obsessors will look at that and see the noise in the OOF region. I look at it and I know from experience that the level of detail and the noise in this 100% view will translate to a perfectly fine 8x10. I'm holding the print in my hand and it looks good (within reason....that hat shadow is not going away).

This is how 100% (aka 'pixel peeping') can be used rationally.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.