Sigma DP2 Merrill: Have any of you tried it?
/forum/topic/1150855/56

1       2       3              56      
57
       58              91       92       end

glacierpete
Registered: Sep 17, 2010
Total Posts: 148
Country: N/A

Jede wrote:
Please check the full size image. There are clear visible vertical lines, which I can't get rid of. I checked on two calibrated monitors here

Here's a 200% crop



Jede,
I see the banding on my monitor. I never experienced that with my dp2m.
Try the topaz denoise trial version. It will remove banding noise. In case you want to buy it, there are plenty of coupons floating around to bring the price down.
http://www.topazlabs.com/denoise/



Collin Orthner
Registered: Feb 09, 2011
Total Posts: 25
Country: Canada

Kit Laughlin wrote:
Thanks Collin; much appreciated. You can probably tell, I'm a big fan of these cameras.

I like your image; as you say, "Somewhat noisy, but loads of detail". Noise is relatively easy to deal with, if you need to, but if you print (as I know you do), then leaving the noise as shot (IMHO) and test printing to see what the interaction will be between the frequency/distribution of the noise and the inbuilt stochastic characteristics of how the printer puts the ink on the paper before doing anything to the noise seems sensible. This noise above will not in any way be a negative in an image, I believe.



I have never even thought of that - good point! Would likely be slightly different, as well, depending on what size the print is. This is going to be interesting for sure. May take quite a bit of testing to nail this down.



mortyb
Registered: Feb 15, 2009
Total Posts: 1364
Country: Norway

sculptormic, do you intentionally go for a look with a green tint?



sculptormic
Registered: Feb 05, 2012
Total Posts: 1406
Country: Netherlands

Very hard to say. It had been raining for weeks and eveything was very mossy. But it is just a question of white balance and easely to correct.
Checked the file again and you are right it is far to green.

Here is a better version. (Changed the other post as well, thanks!)







sculptormic
Registered: Feb 05, 2012
Total Posts: 1406
Country: Netherlands

contas wrote:
@jede:I tried to analyse your X3F file, and see your problem, that's a very common issue of a new Foveon user, b'cause not like previous PP sofwares, SPP is tricky and the camera settings are overset.Your dog will be nice when
-reduce contrast -.7, sharpness -.8,exposure -.3 .
-while X3F fill light +.8 and all 3 noise reduction at max.
Don't panic to a new unacquaintance, take time to get to accustom with your camera settings and SPP and enjoy your new toy.


You have a lot of experience with this sensor and SPP, I believe.
Would be nice to see the corrected file!
Jede?



kosmoskatten
Registered: Oct 11, 2005
Total Posts: 3015
Country: Sweden

Contas: thank you.
Interested in seeing how far you can go with battling the issues Jede. I suspect your sensor is a bit underperforming but it seems like the problem is exacerbated with darker images.

General question: does the Foveon sensor not do as well as other sensors when you are trying to bring out some detail in shadow areas?

I am new to SPP and I welcome all input so I know the potential shortcomings of the sensor. It does seem picky with exposure. But that's fine with me.



kosmoskatten
Registered: Oct 11, 2005
Total Posts: 3015
Country: Sweden

Collin Orthner: it is also my experience working with printing (well, not anymore, but I did it for quite some time) that 50% on screen viewing gives a fair estimate of what the actual print will look like and on top of that you can factor in print dithering depending on paper choice and print size. "Grainy" looking prints with good acuity usually print very well on my preferred papers.

I would think the DP files would hold up well in that regard.



carstenw
Registered: Dec 26, 2005
Total Posts: 15814
Country: Germany

sculptormic wrote:
carstenw wrote:
sculptormic wrote:
Well well Jede, I have other cameras, which I like as well, nor am I a warrior for the Sigma Foveon sensor, but your last oh so miniscule wrong pixel findings are pointing to you as being a little obsessed with proving the sensor is no good.


I think that is not only overly critical, but it is also putting words into his mouth that were never there. Please take the report in the spirit it was offered, and don't ridicule it. It is just information. Each person can decide if it is important to them.
.

Carsten may be you should check it out for yourself before you intervene and judge over all the posts you read. What do you care? Forum conscience? I have my own.


Forum conscience? I am just posting my opinion. Here is the phrasing which I objected to. It uses the tactics of ridicule to discredit an opinion different than your own. When someone gets unreasonably and unfairly hostile like this, I feel compelled to speak out:

"your last oh so miniscule wrong pixel findings are pointing to you as being a little obsessed with proving the sensor is no good."

He sees stripes, and voiced his concern. You turned it into a personal attack.



sculptormic
Registered: Feb 05, 2012
Total Posts: 1406
Country: Netherlands

I think it is unreasonable when Jede sees a few undifined pixels in somebody elses picture @ 200% and make a big thing about it. That is my opinion.

In a post he states Well well, seems that there are people who are a little touchy here about criticizing Sigma or the Foveon sensor. I don't even know if you're looking at the same issue on Juan's photo (I doubt it based on your comments), but if you're happy with your camera, that's ok. It's not serious, but it's there, and not on my unit only. Not a little line, but several lines across the image with constant pattern, on bright color surfaces.

It looks like he sees new defects all the time.
I did not see any proof of all the several lines acros the image with constant pattern, on bright surfaces. You should see my sentence in that context.

Tactics to ridicule? Check the file, I would say!
Could be that he sees things I did not see, but I doubt it.

I never put any words in his mouth which weren't there.

Isn't me being a little touchy here, personal? I wouldn't use the word attack. To big in this context. You make things bigger as they are, so lets stay on the topic.

On top of this I think Jede is perfectly capable to speak out for himself.
But if you feel compelled you should do so!



Yakim Peled
Registered: Nov 18, 2004
Total Posts: 16903
Country: Israel

DPR alert...
DPR alert...
DPR alert...

(in a robotic voice).

Happy shooting,
Yakim.



carstenw
Registered: Dec 26, 2005
Total Posts: 15814
Country: Germany

Well, I see the stripes in the dog photo he posted. I wouldn't be happy with such results myself. I am not quite sure how you can claim not to see them?



Jede
Registered: Oct 09, 2005
Total Posts: 36
Country: Finland

On top of this I think Jede is perfectly capable to speak out for himself.

I actually thought we had this conversation over with, but I'll respond as you seem to expect it. I'm not very keen to respond on your posts, because as carstenw said, you have a confrontational style to express your opinions, which I feel leaves little room for objective rational discussion. I'm not interested in debating, so hopefully we can leave this discussion here. Additionally, I've been in a hurry for several days now with other things, so explaining myself here hasn't been the top priority. Neither do I really feel obliged to.

First of all, thanks for the replies concerning the issue. mortyb, contas and glacierpete, I will try some tricks mentioned by you in my future post processing. I have Nik's Dfine bought for noise removal, and one can get the effect minimized in Photoshop by using masking and brushes on the areas affected. It's a a careful job, but I've saved some nice images with it. I'll see how the output is when using SPP in the way contas described. I'm not yet feeling the SPP is giving me a "flow experience" that I have gotten with Aperture and Photoshop. Workflow feels a bit awkward, and I need more experience and practice in order to make it feel fluent.

It seems that the appearance intensity is dependent on monitor, calibration and knowing what to look for. We all have unique vision and visual thinking patterns, so for some it might be easier to see. My 15" Retina MBP has a pixel density of 220ppi, which is rather high compared to for example 27" Cinema Display with only 109ppi. It really seems to bring flaws out in a way no other display has before. I'm not eyeing images at 200% (or 300% zoom as you wanted to exaggerate), but the effects are visible when simply viewing landscape images in full screen in Aperture or Photoshop. SPP doesn't support Retina display mode yet (we just got Photoshop support in December, thank god), so it's hard to evaluate the results directly in SPP. I like to watch my images in full screen mode (again, WITHOUT zooming), because I seldom have the interest to print them.

Like I said before, my intention was to present an issue which I have learned to observe in many of my images taken with this particular camera. Reading at your posts, I sense that we are not even talking about the same issue here. Maybe I have described it badly, sorry for that, so I'll try once more. For the last time I hope. The problem is, that in some images there seems to be lines going across the image on regular intervals, which cannot be parts of the scene or flaws appearing in the specific environment. It's a technical pattern, that is most visible in bright even surfaces on dark scenes with long exposures, and in some sense also in outdoor photos with big sky areas and large even bright surfaces. On landscape pictures the lines are vertical, and on portrait pictures they appear to be horizontal. The dog image was just one example, and using juan's image as example might have required a better explanation. Here I've cropped the top right corner of the windmill image, and cranked the contrast to maximum. I see those very faint horizontal patterns here on my monitor, please have a look. They were visible even on unedited Flickr image, which is why I chose to use it as an example. If you can't see anything, then I'm putting this under the factors mentioned above, and you really don't have to be obliged to comment further. Click for 100% crop. Sorry juan for exploiting your image in this way

Bigger here

I know when to expect the issue, and it isn't visible on all of my photos. And the dog image is the extreme example, so we all should treat it as just that. Leaving noise control sliders on the middle in SPP seems to eliminate the issue on majority of images. It's not critical, it doesn't make my images worse, doesn't affect the fundamentals of photography, and most certainly isn't a problem for majority of the users. Still, it's there, and each and everyone can decide if it's worth noting. I'm new to Foveon sensor, but this is something I haven't experienced with my previous cameras, and that's why I brought it up in the first place.

This is my last response on this issue, as I really have better things to do (taking images for example). So hopefully we can leave it here.



Jede
Registered: Oct 09, 2005
Total Posts: 36
Country: Finland


No berries today

The resolution in full res image is breathtaking. You can actually count the "branches" in single snowflakes


Composition number 341

I see this tree every day. Still it appears different every time, and I have almost like an obligation to take a snap each time.



mortyb
Registered: Feb 15, 2009
Total Posts: 1364
Country: Norway

I don't doubt the resolution at full size, but at websize, I think many of the photos from the DP2M look a bit oversharpened, too crunchy, for my taste. I guess the amount of detail makes it harder to resize without getting that crunchy look.



carstenw
Registered: Dec 26, 2005
Total Posts: 15814
Country: Germany

I have similar difficulties downsizing my D800 images to forum size, so this does seem to be the case.



Mescalamba
Registered: Jul 06, 2011
Total Posts: 3206
Country: Czech Republic

It easier to downsize files from Foveon, cause they are not interpolated to start with. Just takes good algorithm and not too much sharpening (I agree lots of DP2M shots look a bit oversharpened).

Regular Bayer is much harder, I runned into same problem when doing some pano which ended at 30 mpix, no way to get non-jaggy lines on things that are straight in real world..

And that banding issue, try simply over-expose a bit, when its possible. Kinda like old Canon sensors or Kodak, its base ISO camera anyway..



Luis Cunha
Registered: Dec 26, 2012
Total Posts: 113
Country: Portugal

Is it possible (I canīt remenber; I havenīt yet a DP2M) to shoot both RAW and a small jpeg for the web at the same time?



sculptormic
Registered: Feb 05, 2012
Total Posts: 1406
Country: Netherlands

Well I am sorry Jede if I am to confrontational, but I am glad you took the time to show what you ment in that particular image. In no way you are obliged to do so but since you went so far in pointing out your findings and I couldn't see them; made me a little irritated. Also when one does enjoy a camera so much for it's output in the kind of shots one wants to take, it kind of raised my haires in deed when you hear pages long about all the faults there seems to be in this sensor overflowing all the goodys it can bring.

It is really hard to see on my monitor what you ment but I can see it now. I was looking at a completly different iregularity in the sky.
Now that I know this I will try to find out if this happens in my images and see if it is a property of the sensor.

Without pixel peeping I want to say that your snowscapes look splendid! And I hope you can find enjoyment in using this crazy bricklike little box.

In general I am quiet a friendly guy and use these forums mererly for positive exchange of images and apparatus. Also I have better things to do like you.
You don't have to answer this (don't feel obliged but I am curious if the SPP advise Contas gave you did better your dog image?



carstenw
Registered: Dec 26, 2005
Total Posts: 15814
Country: Germany

I am thinking that the advice to over-expose 1/2 stop when possible might heal it. It looks as if this camera might be quite sensitive to under-exposure.



sculptormic
Registered: Feb 05, 2012
Total Posts: 1406
Country: Netherlands

I have never have so much problems with overexposure but that is mainly due to the fact that my exposure settings are already fixed to -2 or so in SPP. The bigger problem for me are the color and/or WB settings. I mean to get that right. It takes a lot of concentration and good looking to get that ackward WB point at the right place in the circle in SPP. I prefer to get it right there as good as possible, although in ACR/Lightroom you can correct more with the temperature and colour sliders.



1       2       3              56      
57
       58              91       92       end