Ugly noise versus "good" noise

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Rich, Oct 4, 2005.

  1. Rich

    Rich Guest

    Well maybe not good. The sample shots on dpreview.com for the new
    Olympus E-500 are characterized (800 ISO and up) by what I'd term,
    "good" noise. It's not the big, blotchy noise "particles" you see in
    some cameras, but noise more like high speed colour negative film
    grain. It's also easier to eliminate using noise programs like
    "Neat Image." I was able to get rid of the noise in the 1600 ISO
    shot of the gold jar and not destroy the fine detail in the image.
    However, ugly noise, usually big, blotchy and replete with jpeg image
    flaws occurs when some cameras are used at high ISO.
    -Rich
    Rich, Oct 4, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Rich

    Sheldon Guest

    "Rich" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Well maybe not good. The sample shots on dpreview.com for the new
    > Olympus E-500 are characterized (800 ISO and up) by what I'd term,
    > "good" noise. It's not the big, blotchy noise "particles" you see in
    > some cameras, but noise more like high speed colour negative film
    > grain. It's also easier to eliminate using noise programs like
    > "Neat Image." I was able to get rid of the noise in the 1600 ISO
    > shot of the gold jar and not destroy the fine detail in the image.
    > However, ugly noise, usually big, blotchy and replete with jpeg image
    > flaws occurs when some cameras are used at high ISO.
    > -Rich


    I'm with you. When noise resembles grain it really doesn't bother me.
    Sheldon, Oct 5, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Rich

    Ron Hunter Guest

    Rich wrote:
    > Well maybe not good. The sample shots on dpreview.com for the new
    > Olympus E-500 are characterized (800 ISO and up) by what I'd term,
    > "good" noise. It's not the big, blotchy noise "particles" you see in
    > some cameras, but noise more like high speed colour negative film
    > grain. It's also easier to eliminate using noise programs like
    > "Neat Image." I was able to get rid of the noise in the 1600 ISO
    > shot of the gold jar and not destroy the fine detail in the image.
    > However, ugly noise, usually big, blotchy and replete with jpeg image
    > flaws occurs when some cameras are used at high ISO.
    > -Rich


    Yes, large splotchy noise is worse, but noise is noise, and given a
    choice, I would certainly rather not have EITHER.


    --
    Ron Hunter
    Ron Hunter, Oct 5, 2005
    #3
  4. Rich

    Rich Guest

    On Wed, 05 Oct 2005 04:17:29 -0500, Ron Hunter <>
    wrote:

    >Rich wrote:
    >> Well maybe not good. The sample shots on dpreview.com for the new
    >> Olympus E-500 are characterized (800 ISO and up) by what I'd term,
    >> "good" noise. It's not the big, blotchy noise "particles" you see in
    >> some cameras, but noise more like high speed colour negative film
    >> grain. It's also easier to eliminate using noise programs like
    >> "Neat Image." I was able to get rid of the noise in the 1600 ISO
    >> shot of the gold jar and not destroy the fine detail in the image.
    >> However, ugly noise, usually big, blotchy and replete with jpeg image
    >> flaws occurs when some cameras are used at high ISO.
    >> -Rich

    >
    >Yes, large splotchy noise is worse, but noise is noise, and given a
    >choice, I would certainly rather not have EITHER.


    Hey, I wish the 20D had spot metering, then I could buy one.
    We don't always get what we want.
    -Rich
    Rich, Oct 6, 2005
    #4
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Douglas W. Hoyt

    good bad & ugly from the same jpg

    Douglas W. Hoyt, Feb 11, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    344
    Ed Ruf
    Feb 11, 2004
  2. Harley Solomon
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    461
    Harley Solomon
    May 14, 2004
  3. The Dweeb
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    399
    The Dweeb
    May 18, 2004
  4. Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo

    Re: Mozilla versus IE versus Opera versus Safari

    Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo, May 8, 2008, in forum: Firefox
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    718
    Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
    May 8, 2008
  5. RichA
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    440
    John A.
    May 22, 2012
Loading...

Share This Page