Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 9, 2013, 10:58 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 234
Default Noisy pictures

Hi,
I've noticed that some of my pictures are getting noisy over time ...... some, not all (These are ones that I took with a Canon S5, not that that has anything to do with it.) I have a habit of cloning my drive every few months, and I'm wondering if this process is causing deterioration in my pictures. Has anyone else noticed this phenomenon?
....... john
Shinnen is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Dec 9, 2013, 1:36 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

I can't say I have. Digital images don't typically degrade the way that analog images do.

Can it be that, over time, you've become a more educated, experienced, and critical viewer of your own images, and you're just now noticing things that you might have missed in the past?
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 9, 2013, 3:49 PM   #3
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

Digital images don't degrade, no matter how many times you copy them.

File corruption can occur, but that will break the file and make it unreadable, not make it slightly worse.
__________________
My gallery
My X100 blog
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 9, 2013, 9:26 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 234
Default

Hi Tcav,
Well, yes..... you are definitely right about that. I used to sharpen my pictures way too much, and only realized it when I went back to them after a couple of years. But, I don't think that that's it.
Hi Paripatetic,
Thanks. I didn't realize that. Well then, I don't know what's going on. I'll take a closer look, and see if I can nail down what's going, if not why.
..... john
Shinnen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2013, 7:11 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New England, USA
Posts: 2,069
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TCav View Post
I can't say I have. Digital images don't typically degrade the way that analog images do.

Can it be that, over time, you've become a more educated, experienced, and critical viewer of your own images, and you're just now noticing things that you might have missed in the past?
Or a better monitor/laptop/pc/device/software to view them on?
__________________
in my bag: e-m1, 7-14mm pro, 14-54mm mk ii, 50-200mm mk i, 70-300mm
in my pocket: e-pm2 lumix 12-32
ramcewan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2013, 8:42 AM   #6
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

One possibility is if you are using jpgs and are repeatedly opening them to view and then SAVING them. Each time you actually save a jpg it re-compresses the file and that (being a lossy process) will degrade the images just a bit every time you re-save it from an editor.

Some programs won't re-compress if you don't edit, but some might if you say yes when they ask you if you want to save.
__________________
My gallery
My X100 blog
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2013, 10:32 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

^ Good point.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2013, 7:32 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 234
Default

Hi Guys,
Good points.
I don't think the monitor or computer is the problem. It's the same one I've had for a long time, and seems to work fine. (We're talking a period of about 3 or 4 years here.) And it's not all of the images, just some. I'm not sure at this point if there's a common denominator here.
Could it be something to do with bad sectors, or the result of defragging, or ??
Thanks for reminding me about the loss during saving, I had forgotten about that. (I think most of my editors are set to 95%). None of my editors ask me if I want to save them, unless I do some editing, which I haven't done to any of these for a long time.
It's not a big issue, just odd.
..... john
Shinnen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2013, 8:28 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New England, USA
Posts: 2,069
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shinnen View Post
Hi Guys,
...Could it be something to do with bad sectors, or the result of defragging, or ??
Thanks for reminding me about the loss during saving, I had forgotten about that. (I think most of my editors are set to 95%). None of my editors ask me if I want to save them, unless I do some editing, which I haven't done to any of these for a long time.
It's not a big issue, just odd.
..... john
yeah as a 15 year IT professional I can say digital files don't corrupt in any way that renders them still readable but degraded in a fashion like you describe. When a file is corrupt it just doesn't open and there is not much you can do without employing specialized software. Which is why you should always back up your photos!

I would take a look at the last save, last modified, create and date taken fields in the exif and see if these photos have recent modified dates. I would also look at size as compared to other un-cropped images file from same camera/software combo (ideally same shoot), if there was some type of "save as" degradation the degraded pictures would have both more recent modified dates and smaller size as compared to the non degraded pictures, again assuming you are comparing un-cropped images.
__________________
in my bag: e-m1, 7-14mm pro, 14-54mm mk ii, 50-200mm mk i, 70-300mm
in my pocket: e-pm2 lumix 12-32
ramcewan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2013, 2:35 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 234
Default

Hi,
I looked at the affected pictures wrt to the criteria you suggested, and I can't see any commonality. Here's an example (one of the worst) of what I'm seeing. http://shinnen.ca/Deer3.jpg It looks like over zealous sharpening, which I did tend to do when I first started into photography, but the phenomenun seems to be only sporadic.
..... john
Shinnen 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 9:22 AM.