A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Photo Equipment » 35mm Photo Equipment
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

SI Comments - Cooper



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #1  
Old January 11th 13, 02:06 AM posted to alt.photography,rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Robert Coe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,901
Default SI Comments - Cooper

On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 22:18:18 -0500, Peter wrote:
: On 1/9/2013 10:04 PM, Robert Coe wrote:
: On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 21:54:31 -0500, Peter wrote:
: : On 1/9/2013 9:33 PM, Robert Coe wrote:
: : On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 21:18:06 -0500, Peter wrote:
: : : On 1/9/2013 11:48 AM, Tony Cooper wrote:
: : :
: : : snip
: : :
: : : Peter Newman - "Almost Off" is very much South Beach, but not much
: : : "Street". I like "Pick a Winner", but I'm not keen on that much
: : : grain. Good composition and subject choice. Ditto for all comments
: : : when looking at "The Loser".
: : :
: : :
: : : Thanks for your comment.
: : : Unfortunately, I too would have liked a little less grain, but shooting
: : : conditions prevailed. Look at the ISO, aperature and shutter speed. It
: : : was better than no image.
: :
: : Fair enough, but that's not really the issue, is it? The question is whether
: : accepting the grain is better than applying noise reduction at the cost of a
: : corresponding reduction in sharpness. That's the usual tradeoff in low light,
: : high-ISO digital photography. And grain is counter-intuitive to the human eye;
: : loss of sharpness isn't.
: :
: :
: : You are right. but, that is a decision for the photographer to make.
: : Having made it, I submitted the images to the SI for evaluation of their
: : comments. In this case the mandate also specified only minor
: : photoshopping. I felt that use of NR wold have violated the mandate.
:
: You're right, almost by definition, about the photographer's artistic license.
: But NR can be preset in any modern camera. Assuming you shoot in RAW, which
: I'm sure you do, all you're doing when you play with the NR is homing in on
: the right initial setting. I can't imagine how that violates the mandate.
:
:
: Yes it can.
: However, I usually do my NR in post. One of the drawbacks of shooting
: with large files is that any in camera processing slows down my frame
: rate. Not asking for sympathy, just explaining my choices.

I quite understand, but really that was my point. Since you can set NR in
camera, it can hardly be overprocessing to tweak the NR level of a RAW image
in post.

Bob
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
PING: Tony Cooper Savageduck[_3_] Digital Photography 1 September 29th 11 07:26 AM
(SI) People want comments - here's comments! Sounds of the season. [email protected] 35mm Photo Equipment 0 September 24th 10 03:13 AM
comments please - red tulip_03-comments please.jpg JLord remove \clothes\ before replying - \clothe Photographing Nature 0 April 19th 05 10:58 PM
Comments Claim Guy Digital Photography 10 December 6th 04 01:27 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:07 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.