EOS 350D hot pixels

I have been playing around with a new filter when I started noticing hot
pixels on my 350D. So I did some tests: I have two pretty visible hot pixels
in the image. One is bright blue and one is bright red. Both are about 2x3
pixels large.

They show up either:
- with ISO = 800 at any shutter speed
- with ISO 800 starting from shutter speeds of about 1"

If I enable C.fn2 (noise reduction) they go away on long exposures (1" or
more), but they definitely remain at ISO 800 and ISO 1600 on faster
exposures (obviously, because noise reduction only kicks in at 1" or
slower).

When the camera was brand new (3 months ago) the hot pixels weren't there.

Is this supposed to be normal? I'm definitely not into returning the camera
to Canon as I'll have to wait a month or more I suppose... the hot pixels
are not really bothering me on "regular", non-night pictures, but they have
to be "healed out" on some dark pictures.

Anyone?

Thanks
-Manuel



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Manuel W." wrote in message
...
I have been playing around with a new filter when I started noticing hot
pixels on my 350D. So I did some tests: I have two pretty visible hot
pixels in the image. One is bright blue and one is bright red. Both are
about 2x3 pixels large.

They show up either:
- with ISO = 800 at any shutter speed
- with ISO 800 starting from shutter speeds of about 1"

If I enable C.fn2 (noise reduction) they go away on long exposures (1" or
more), but they definitely remain at ISO 800 and ISO 1600 on faster
exposures (obviously, because noise reduction only kicks in at 1" or
slower).

When the camera was brand new (3 months ago) the hot pixels weren't there.

Is this supposed to be normal? I'm definitely not into returning the
camera to Canon as I'll have to wait a month or more I suppose... the hot
pixels are not really bothering me on "regular", non-night pictures, but
they have to be "healed out" on some dark pictures.

Anyone?


Hot pixels are, unfortunately, par for the digital course.

You have two solutions available -

For RAW files, use Adobe camera raw, or Silkypix to convert the raw files.
Both will eliminate hot pixels during the conversion process - my own
opinion is that Silkypix is the best RAW converter available at the moment.

For Jpgs, use 'Flameout' from Nigh****ch software -
http://www.nigh****chsoftware.com/flam/flam.htm

This is cheap ($15) and makes a first class job of interpolating out hot
pixels from the image.

It's one drawback is the default compression when saving Jpgs - so choose to
save as a Tiff file and reconvert to Jpg if desired.

Voila! - hot pixels solved.





Thanks
-Manuel


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+
Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
=----

Manuel W. wrote:
I have been playing around with a new filter when I started noticing
hot pixels on my 350D. So I did some tests: I have two pretty visible
hot pixels in the image. One is bright blue and one is bright red.
Both are about 2x3 pixels large.

It's probably only one hot pixel in each of the cases. Bayer
interpolation does the rest.

Jan B=F6hme

"Jan Böhme" ha scritto nel messaggio
oups.com...
Manuel W. wrote:
It's probably only one hot pixel in each of the cases. Bayer
interpolation does the rest.

But do you think I can consider this as "normal", or is it worth worrying
about? As in "my camera is going to break soon if it's acting like this"? If
it's something that is likely to give me big trouble in the future, maybe
it's worth looking at immediately. If it simply is that way, I won't
bother...

-Manuel



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Manuel W." wrote in message
...
"Jan Böhme" ha scritto nel messaggio
oups.com...
Manuel W. wrote:
It's probably only one hot pixel in each of the cases. Bayer
interpolation does the rest.

But do you think I can consider this as "normal", or is it worth worrying
about? As in "my camera is going to break soon if it's acting like this"?
If it's something that is likely to give me big trouble in the future,
maybe it's worth looking at immediately. If it simply is that way, I won't
bother...

-Manuel


I give up!

I posted the solution to your problem - and I used to worry about hot pixles
as well, until I found Silkypix & Flameout - but you're too ****ing ignorant
to even say 'thanks'

So ******** to you, and your hot pixels.




----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+
Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
=----

"Pinky & Perky sing Parsifal" ha scritto
nel messaggio ...
I give up!

I posted the solution to your problem - and I used to worry about hot
pixles as well, until I found Silkypix & Flameout - but you're too ****ing
ignorant to even say 'thanks'

So ******** to you, and your hot pixels.


Hey, calm down please... *your* solution did show up on my news server
*after* I posted my 2nd reply. Otherwise I probably wouldn't have asked
again.

I'm not inherently rude (let alone "ignorant") only because I didn't say
"thanks" for something I hadn't even seen yet. But you are pretty rude for
talking to people that way for no apparent reason.

Anyway, thanks ... but IMHO this is uneblievable.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Manuel W." wrote in message
...
"Pinky & Perky sing Parsifal" ha scritto
nel messaggio ...
I give up!

I posted the solution to your problem - and I used to worry about hot
pixles as well, until I found Silkypix & Flameout - but you're too
****ing ignorant to even say 'thanks'

So ******** to you, and your hot pixels.


Hey, calm down please... *your* solution did show up on my news server
*after* I posted my 2nd reply. Otherwise I probably wouldn't have asked
again.

I'm not inherently rude (let alone "ignorant") only because I didn't say
"thanks" for something I hadn't even seen yet. But you are pretty rude for
talking to people that way for no apparent reason.

Anyway, thanks ... but IMHO this is uneblievable.


Then, my apologies. I do sometimes get ****ed off by people who can't be
bothered to respond when someone (anyone) takes the trouble to help them.

But, as it wasn't on your server, it was me who was too hasty.

Anyway, you'll find Flameout & Silkypix (or Adobe Raw) a great asset which
will remove the worry of hot pixels.

Regards

"Pinky & Perky sing Parsifal" ha scritto
nel messaggio ...
Then, my apologies. I do sometimes get ****ed off by people who can't be
bothered to respond when someone (anyone) takes the trouble to help them.

I hate that, too ... so, you're not alone :-)

Thank you for answering, I'll definitely try the softwares you recommended.

-Manuel



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Manuel W." wrote in message
...
"Pinky & Perky sing Parsifal" ha scritto
nel messaggio ...
Then, my apologies. I do sometimes get ****ed off by people who can't be
bothered to respond when someone (anyone) takes the trouble to help them.

I hate that, too ... so, you're not alone :-)

Thank you for answering, I'll definitely try the softwares you
recommended.

-Manuel

For Flameout I found it best to take a Tiff reference shot @ 1600 ISO, using
the slowest shutter speed available before noise reduction kicks in (or with
noise reduction 'off', if the camera has that option)

This will probably produce lots of borderline hot pixels that wouldn't be
noticed in normal shots - but it makes a good template for Flameout to work
from and all the hot pixels will be interpolated out, including those which
are not usually visible.

Flameout saves the reference Tiff, so it's a simple matter to run images
through it as a matter of course as part of post processing.

Don't forget to save the corrected image as a Tiff file in order to avoid
the default Flameout Jpeg compression - I tend to use Flameout first, and
then work on the resulting Tiff file in PS. If you want a Jpeg it's simple
enough to convert back at high quality when you've finished working on the
image.

"Pinky & Perky sing Parsifal" ha scritto
nel messaggio ...
For Flameout I found it best to take a Tiff reference shot @ 1600 ISO,
using the slowest shutter speed available before noise reduction kicks in
(or with noise reduction 'off', if the camera has that option)
[...]

Thanks for the useful tips, now I have a lot of things to try out :-).
Actually my camera (350D) doesn't support TIFF, only RAW or JPEG. I'm
normally not a RAW-shooter, but for those shots where hot pixels are
visible, I probably will become one. The shots where this is the case are
usually quite hard to "get right" at the first attempt (ie. without
post-processing) anyway :-) (at least for me) so shooting RAW is probably a
good idea in this case.

-Manuel



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----