p.4 #3 · Sony compression creates artifacts in A7r ?
Max, in an earlier thread, you listed a number of reasons why you wouldn't be keeping the A7R you had ordered. That is why I am not the least bit surprised to see you finding problems with the camera, now that you have it.
None of this bothers me, as I don't view my pics at 8x or 11x, and that, every time I get a higher resolution sensor, even the standard 100% crop gets more and more demanding and further removed from standard-size (screen or print) useage.
Where I tend to be skeptical is when you say you have a sincere interest in finding a solution. From your earlier post announcing why you wouldn't keep the camera, I would have thought this a mis-print from "I have a sincere interest in finding a problem".
Keep it or give it back, whatever floats your boat. But taking not-for-test-purposes pictures is what floats mine. Enjoy!
p.4 #4 · Sony compression creates artifacts in A7r ?
tsdevine wrote:
Can you post another link (the original is maxed out). I'd like to try DxO, which is what I have been using. I haven't seen anything but goodness in my shots.
-Tim
Tim, I PM'd you a link - after you download the RAW feel free to post the link in to this thread
p.4 #5 · Sony compression creates artifacts in A7r ?
MaxBerlin wrote:
What size did you print at ?
What capture and export are you using ?
I sincerely want to find a solution.
My problem was much more obvious than yours - I could see it on screen in the 'FIT' view in LR5.3RC and it vanished with an A4 print (similar size) from my laser printer. I'm kind of assuming an inkjet print would be similar, I can't imagine it would be 'blockier'.
Although I don't think it is the same effect as you are seeing I posted it as a general warning that you should not always believe what you see until you have eliminated possible weak links. Although my bro and I both have Dell IPS monitors he didn't see the effect (also using LR5.3RC) but then he has a different model.
It was in an area of gradual change in tone of the sky at dawn and was exaggerated with an 18mm lens vs a 28mm. I'll try to get myself a Flickr account and post the shots - putting them on my website murders my bandwidth allowance (cheap hosting!).
I also got the same effect at sunset with the 28mm (all lenses C/Y Contax Zeiss) but on shots taken when I swung away from the sunset the effect vanished.
There was heavy apparent vignetting with the 18mm dawn shots, less with the 28 dawn/sunset and none obvious with the 28 pointing away from the sunset. I say apparent vignetting because it was centred on the brightest area of sky, even when that was off centre, so is probably just the natural variation in tone of the sky given the wide view of an 18mm on FF.
Just to give you a laugh...........the only reason I made the print and found the immediate problem to be the monitor was as an example to go with a letter I'd written to Sony about the (non) problem
p.4 #6 · Sony compression creates artifacts in A7r ?
philber wrote:
Max, in an earlier thread, you listed a number of reasons why you wouldn't be keeping the A7R you had ordered. That is why I am not the least bit surprised to see you finding problems with the camera, now that you have it.
None of this bothers me, as I don't view my pics at 8x or 11x, and that, every time I get a higher resolution sensor, even the standard 100% crop gets more and more demanding and further removed from standard-size (screen or print) useage.
Where I tend to be skeptical is when you say you have a sincere interest in finding a solution. From your earlier post announcing why you wouldn't keep the camera, I would have thought this a mis-print from "I have a sincere interest in finding a problem".
Keep it or give it back, whatever floats your boat. But taking not-for-test-purposes pictures is what floats mine. Enjoy!...Show more →
# 1 - it's a problem seen at 1X as in the last screen shot I posted.
# 2 - I've been waiting for this camera almost since the n7 was released. It's not living up to what it could or should be.
# 3 - I won't be satisfied with unreasonable compromises or rush to market shortcomings. The 'lossless compression' may only show hints in the 1st iteration but in the 2nd compression (into JPEG) at full size there are issues with what the A7r is doing.
#4 - The NEX7 shoots at an effective 56mp due to the smaller pixel size - this may make the problem unnoticeable or the algorithm and processor for the N7 may be more 'right sized'.
#5 - I've done as much praising as ranting on the A7r. The primary thought I have this AM is that it is one of the finest B&W cameras made. But color, compression, tonal transitions aren't its high point.
# 6 - I am astounded by how many people either a) don't read, b) feel personally threatened when a flaw is found with their purchases c) don't have an adequate setup for viewing high resolution images at size.
Over and over, I keep reading "it's not there" "8x or 11x" and "I shoot photos not test shots" or "over processed" when time and time again I put up screen shots of RAW, TIFFs at 1x (100%) no processing images and only use the magnification to show what is happening at the per pixel level.
# 7 and most importantly - I shoot images for tomorrow. Meaning that larger and better displays are going to be a part of our lives. I want to view the image 10 years from now at 8K and still think it's a good photo. When I look at 1x today - it's not there.
Without a solution, I will be sending the A7r back. I am going back to the same place and using the NEX7 later today to try to document this further.
p.4 #7 · Sony compression creates artifacts in A7r ?
hrossm wrote:
My problem was much more obvious than yours - I could see it on screen in the 'FIT' view in LR5.3RC and it vanished with an A4 print (similar size) from my laser printer. I'm kind of assuming an inkjet print would be similar, I can't imagine it would be 'blockier'.
Although I don't think it is the same effect as you are seeing I posted it as a general warning that you should not always believe what you see until you have eliminated possible weak links. Although my bro and I both have Dell IPS monitors he didn't see the effect (also using LR5.3RC) but then he has a different model.
It was in an area of gradual change in tone of the sky at dawn and was exaggerated with an 18mm lens vs a 28mm. I'll try to get myself a Flickr account and post the shots - putting them on my website murders my bandwidth allowance (cheap hosting!).
I also got the same effect at sunset with the 28mm (all lenses C/Y Contax Zeiss) but on shots taken when I swung away from the sunset the effect vanished.
There was heavy apparent vignetting with the 18mm dawn shots, less with the 28 dawn/sunset and none obvious with the 28 pointing away from the sunset. I say apparent vignetting because it was centred on the brightest area of sky, even when that was off centre, so is probably just the natural variation in tone of the sky given the wide view of an 18mm on FF.
Just to give you a laugh...........the only reason I made the print and found the immediate problem to be the monitor was as an example to go with a letter I'd written to Sony about the (non) problem ...Show more →
I am going to look at the images on a smaller - lower res monitor and lesser video card.
Maybe I will finally be able to not see what everyone else is not seeing.
p.4 #8 · Sony compression creates artifacts in A7r ?
This thread doesn't cease to amaze.
I find hilarious your above assessment; that if we can't see the so called problem in your pictures, then it is because we lack the adequate hardware (res &/or size). This assumes that the "problem" exists while you shun the possibility that it is rather in your head; or more importantly, the fact that you are judging pixels (and not images) at 10X.
I really have no idea what the "garbage pixels" is this whole business you have spent pages ranting about.
Edit: How big would your resulting images print to in order to have this problem visible?
Sorry, but I don't see anything on my 24" 1920x1200 HP LP2475w monitor being driven by my NVIDIA Quadro K3000M in 32bit color mode. Didn't see anything on my other machine either.
p.4 #10 · Sony compression creates artifacts in A7r ?
I have been looking at a lot of images lately to see if I could actually 100% see this compression issue with Sony raws (RX1 uses the same raw compression) and frankly I'm not seeing that it's really a Sony raw issue. I suspected it was earlier myself but what I have found is:
1) Adobe Camera Raw/ LIghtroom color profile for current Sony cameras is problematic. In most posterization issues, you will see a magenta blotchiness, just as is visible in Max's example above. This is a Adobe Profile/ ACR issue. Make a better custom profile or modify the existing Adobe profile and this will go a long way towards getting rid of this blotchiness/ posterization. If anyone is seeing this issue, try a different RAW converter to see for yourself. Out of 4 different converters (ACR, Sony's Image Data Converter, Raw Photo Processor and Iridient Developer), I found both Raw Photo Processor and Iridient Developer to be the best as far as dealing with subtle gradations. Sony's own converter was surprisingly the worst.
2) Beyond the above, moving to a more limited gamut like sRGB can accentuate/ exaggerate the appearance of this issue if it exists at all in the original, wider gamut image. Sharpening for the web and resizing just compounds the problem (if it's there to begin with).
Since I don't use Adobe's straight canned profile, I really don't see this problem in my own images. I have seen it in images posted by others and I'm now fairly certain it's due to the above.
...which you probably exported from LR using the wrong color profile, all other magnified crops posted do not show what you have described. At this point, I am considering this thread to be a prank and this won't be tolerated here.
I think it's time for you to take your 8x crops somewhere else.
Fred
p.4 #12 · Sony compression creates artifacts in A7r ?
MaxBerlin wrote:
# 1 - it's a problem seen at 1X as in the last screen shot I posted.
# 2 - I've been waiting for this camera almost since the n7 was released. It's not living up to what it could or should be.
# 3 - I won't be satisfied with unreasonable compromises or rush to market shortcomings. The 'lossless compression' may only show hints in the 1st iteration but in the 2nd compression (into JPEG) at full size there are issues with what the A7r is doing.
#4 - The NEX7 shoots at an effective 56mp due to the smaller pixel size - this may make the problem unnoticeable or the algorithm and processor for the N7 may be more 'right sized'.
#5 - I've done as much praising as ranting on the A7r. The primary thought I have this AM is that it is one of the finest B&W cameras made. But color, compression, tonal transitions aren't its high point.
# 6 - I am astounded by how many people either a) don't read, b) feel personally threatened when a flaw is found with their purchases c) don't have an adequate setup for viewing high resolution images at size.
Over and over, I keep reading "it's not there" "8x or 11x" and "I shoot photos not test shots" or "over processed" when time and time again I put up screen shots of RAW, TIFFs at 1x (100%) no processing images and only use the magnification to show what is happening at the per pixel level.
# 7 and most importantly - I shoot images for tomorrow. Meaning that larger and better displays are going to be a part of our lives. I want to view the image 10 years from now at 8K and still think it's a good photo. When I look at 1x today - it's not there.
Without a solution, I will be sending the A7r back. I am going back to the same place and using the NEX7 later today to try to document this further. ...Show more →
Ok, good. Problem solved. Fred, can you lock this thread now!
p.4 #13 · Sony compression creates artifacts in A7r ?
Tariq Gibran wrote:
I have been looking at a lot of images lately to see if I could actually 100% see this compression issue with Sony raws (RX1 uses the same raw compression) and frankly I'm not seeing that it's really a Sony raw issue. I suspected it was earlier myself but what I have found is:
1) Adobe Camera Raw/ LIghtroom color profile for current Sony cameras is problematic. In most posterization issues, you will see a magenta blotchiness, just as is visible in Max's example above. This is a Adobe Profile/ ACR issue. Make a better custom profile or modify the existing Adobe profile and this will go a long way towards getting rid of this blotchiness/ posterization. If anyone is seeing this issue, try a different RAW converter to see for yourself. Out of 4 different converters (ACR, Sony's Image Data Converter, Raw Photo Processor and Iridient Developer), I found both Raw Photo Processor and Iridient Developer to be the best as far as dealing with subtle gradations. Sony's own converter was surprisingly the worst.
2) Beyond the above, moving to a more limited gamut like sRGB can accentuate/ exaggerate the appearance of this issue if it exists at all in the original, wider gamut image. Sharpening for the web and resizing just compounds the problem (if it's there to begin with).
Since I don't use Adobe's straight canned profile, I really don't see this problem in my own images. I have seen it in images posted by others and I'm now fairly certain it's due to the above. ...Show more →
I agree Sony's is the worst. sRGB seems to do better than the others as an output. I keep posting 1x (100%) photos and the crowd thinks it's my wide gamut 2560x1440 display in sRGB causing the issue. Copy as DNG into LR5.3 I thought helped but it only fixed the artifacts but not the tonal transitions. (halfway there)
...which you probably exported from LR using the wrong color profile, all other magnified crops posted do not show what you have described. At this point, I am considering this thread to be a prank and this won't be tolerated here.
I think it's time for you to take your 8x crops somewhere else.
Fred
Fred,
I agree that that is a post processing issue and agree that the A7r may need less or more sensitive post than the the NEX7.
However, I am being sincere and have done as much as I can to document with 1x (at 100%) the issues that the A7r is showing. I even documented that importing into LR as a DNG fixes the artifacts that Lloyd found earlier in the week.
p.4 #15 · Sony compression creates artifacts in A7r ?
max,
1 – if that is a 1x shot you have a lot more issues with your computer (each pixel takes up 4 on my monitor)
2 – for the love of god, your NEX-7 uses the same basic lossy compression as the a7r (note how all your NEX-7 arw files are about 25mb). also please stop saying "lossless". nobody including sony is claiming that their raw is lossless, and you (and many other people) seem to have no idea how compression works.
3 – see #2
4 – pixel density should have nothing to do with processing (plenty to do with lens performance though), pixel number is much more likely to be an issue. the a7r's 36mp are putting more strain on your viewing software and it is likely doing a crappy (and extremely lossy ) job of downsizing the image for viewing at normal sizes.
5 – most likely you are just overthinking and overexamining this, but the lack of AA filter will cause harsher transitions and artifacts that require a complete reworking of how you downsize images.
6 – the big issue for me is if i can't see an issue at 100% i don't care about it and most people people don't care if they can't see it at 50% or 20%. seeing things at 11x just removes context and adds nothing to viewability of the problem. it also makes it looks like you care nothing about actual pictures. if somebody can't see any issues on their monitor/prints why would they want a "better" monitor that will make their images look worse? btw, even (especially) well calibrated monitors can show issues that aren't really there since they remap certain colors and cannot display the full colorspace.
7 – i always find this argument ridiculous. if you are shooting for tomorrow you should focus on taking pics that are worthwhile and won't get discarded without a second glance by your grandkids. do you think the pictures that have survived from the last 100 years do so because of superior image quality? another probably more relevant argument to you is that if an image looks good printed 36" it'll look great on a 3ft 8k monitor. if an image doesn't look good at a given print size it won't look good at a similar monitor size. increasing monitor resolution won't make old pictures look worse it'll make them look better at normal viewing just as increasing megapixels makes crappy lenses look better if you compare them to lower megapixel images at the same viewing size. the only thing 8k monitors will do for you is make it so you have to magnify the image to 22x to see you faults instead of 11x since the pixels will be so much smaller.
p.4 #16 · Sony compression creates artifacts in A7r ?
When I saw Max's MS paint scribble notations on the 100% crops I got the sinking feeling that we'll soon be seeing these same crops on the Fake Chuck Westfall blog.
p.4 #17 · Sony compression creates artifacts in A7r ?
sebboh wrote:
max,
1 – if that is a 1x shot you have a lot more issues with your computer (each pixel takes up 4 on my monitor)
2 – for the love of god, your NEX-7 uses the same basic lossy compression as the a7r (note how all your NEX-7 arw files are about 25mb). also please stop saying "lossless". nobody including sony is claiming that their raw is lossless, and you (and many other people) seem to have no idea how compression works.
3 – see #2
4 – pixel density should have nothing to do with processing (plenty to do with lens performance though), pixel number is much more likely to be an issue. the a7r's 36mp are putting more strain on your viewing software and it is likely doing a crappy (and extremely lossy ) job of downsizing the image for viewing at normal sizes.
5 – most likely you are just overthinking and overexamining this, but the lack of AA filter will cause harsher transitions and artifacts that require a complete reworking of how you downsize images.
6 – the big issue for me is if i can't see an issue at 100% i don't care about it and most people people don't care if they can't see it at 50% or 20%. seeing things at 11x just removes context and adds nothing to viewability of the problem. it also makes it looks like you care nothing about actual pictures. if somebody can't see any issues on their monitor/prints why would they want a "better" monitor that will make their images look worse? btw, even (especially) well calibrated monitors can show issues that aren't really there since they remap certain colors and cannot display the full colorspace.
7 – i always find this argument ridiculous. if you are shooting for tomorrow you should focus on taking pics that are worthwhile and won't get discarded without a second glance by your grandkids. do you think the pictures that have survived from the last 100 years do so because of superior image quality? another probably more relevant argument to you is that if an image looks good printed 36" it'll look great on a 3ft 8k monitor. if an image doesn't look good at a given print size it won't look good at a similar monitor size. increasing monitor resolution won't make old pictures look worse it'll make them look better at normal viewing just as increasing megapixels makes crappy lenses look better if you compare them to lower megapixel images at the same viewing size. the only thing 8k monitors will do for you is make it so you have to magnify the image to 22x to see you faults instead of 11x since the pixels will be so much smaller.
Everything else is zero's, this is my default preset with NR and CA removal tweaked (in an actual render I'd add a curve to drop the mid shadows a bit, but that would wipe out much of the tones in the background so I didn't add it).
This is the Zeiss 135 APO being used. Do these settings add in the magenta pixels ?
lens correction
Defring 5
Purple Hue 30/70
The injection of magenta pixels would serve to break up the compression artifacts.
p.4 #20 · Sony compression creates artifacts in A7r ?
Guari wrote:
I really have no idea what the "garbage pixels" is this whole business you have spent pages ranting about.
Garbage pixels are those that have been compressed to show an approximation of the color value instead of the actual color value. It is slightly visible as RAW from the A7r but when gone through a second iteration and with no post or output sharpening they are compressed again and the loss in information results in banding of these gradients.
The camera shoots great, high resolution MTFs - I spent the first day documenting this in Imatest results.
But once out in field testing I caught the orange peel (admittedly at high magnification and not really an issue but demonstrative that there is a compression issue) and the problem with the tonal transitions in the coke bottle scene.
Edit: How big would your resulting images print to in order to have this problem visible?...Show more →
I don't print as a rule and don't print large but I envision a large 4k or 8k screen playing my 'best of images' in the next 3-7 years. These photos won't pass the sniff test as is.
Archive 2013 · Sony compression creates artifacts in A7r ?
.
another probably more relevant argument to you is that if an image looks good printed 36" it'll look great on a 3ft 8k monitor. if an image doesn't look good at a given print size it won't look good at a similar monitor size. increasing monitor resolution won't make old pictures look worse it'll make them look better at normal viewing just as increasing megapixels makes crappy lenses look better if you compare them to lower megapixel images at the same viewing size. the only thing 8k monitors will do for you is make it so you have to magnify the image to 22x to see you faults instead of 11x since the pixels will be so much smaller.