Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 4, 2010, 9:31 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

ev down to prevent blowing out the details.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 4, 2010, 9:33 PM   #12
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

well, the f20 would cause some diffraction, making it a bit soft, and the uv filter could have softened it.

it seems to be something in the resize interpolation. i am not sure why, they are compressed a bit heavy, but nothing that should impact the IQ that much.

do the originals look much better?
__________________
MyFlickr
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2010, 10:56 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
armadilloshield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Singapore
Posts: 375
Default Some test

Tonight going out to shoot some more
Taken out my UV filter, taken using F/8 or F/9. ISO below 200.
All image resize and some crop to create panorama effect
Attached Images
     
__________________
***People only failed when they give up***
armadilloshield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2010, 11:15 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

There is still something going on with the resizing or cropping. There is a square pixel halo around the buildings in the sky. The noise level is much better.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2010, 5:19 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,052
Default

I don't see a square pixel halo around building in the second group, at least not on my home monitor. The second set looks really nice to me.

I do like the viewpoint of the first group - looking down on the urban lights at night is always fun.

What program do you use to resize your pictures?
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2010, 5:40 PM   #16
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

there is still clear resize/sharpening artifacts. and if you look at the sky, the gradations in color do not go smoothly, you can see clear pixelation borders between the different tones, this is very clear in #1 and #4 of the 2nd set.

could you tell us exactly your workflow on how you get from camera to this point. there is something wrong along the way, and hope we can help you get it figured out.
__________________
MyFlickr
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2010, 8:11 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
armadilloshield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Singapore
Posts: 375
Default

Thanks again for viewing
I think I know why now.
I'm using faststone to resize the image.
and in order to reduce the file size, I set the compress to 75%.
below resize with 95% compress.
Hope my assumption are right
Attached Images
 
__________________
***People only failed when they give up***
armadilloshield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2010, 8:16 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

much better, it took care of the pixilations pretty well, still a some finer pixilations.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 14, 2010, 5:28 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
armadilloshield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Singapore
Posts: 375
Default

I think bcos of the jpeg quality.
Now taken in RAW.
Attached Images
 
__________________
***People only failed when they give up***
armadilloshield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 14, 2010, 1:58 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
Wingman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Hebron, Kentucky (northern Kentucky/Greater Cincinnati):KCVG
Posts: 4,322
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hards80 View Post
if those are straight from camera jpeg, there is something wrong with your resizing. because the sharpening artifacts around the edges are terrible.
Overall the iamges look very softon my montior...nothing that would present the merits of this camera! The second set looks much better. I also noticed that the second set was shot at f8 vs f16. F8 may be in the sweeet spot range for the lens that you used.

Last edited by Wingman; Nov 14, 2010 at 2:01 PM.
Wingman is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:30 PM.