Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I shot a few pics withe RD-1s tonight at a gallery opening after I'd finished with the work side of things. I figured it would be a chance to try the camera with the 50mm C Sonnar and see how it went with the effective cropped 75mm focal length as a tightish portrait taker.
These are straight out of the camera (RAW) and as you can see the areas of high exposure are blown out and pinkish which indicates to me there was a light source coming from somewhere that the sensor wasn't happy with. Most of the shots seem to be affected in various degrees wherever there are highlights. Is this just something out of the ordinary caused by an unusual light source or is the sensor suspect?
I meant to mention I was under some halogen downlights at the time.
These are straight out of the camera (RAW) and as you can see the areas of high exposure are blown out and pinkish which indicates to me there was a light source coming from somewhere that the sensor wasn't happy with. Most of the shots seem to be affected in various degrees wherever there are highlights. Is this just something out of the ordinary caused by an unusual light source or is the sensor suspect?
I meant to mention I was under some halogen downlights at the time.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I also meant to mention I use my D700 in this area all the time and have had no issues at all.
What ISO were you using?
FrankS
Registered User
The effect looks like posterization.
ruediger
Member
To me this looks like the highlights are way overexposed and your raw converter trying to bring some of them back (IMHO there is no such thing like a straight out of cam raw). So for an unclipped color channel that is OK, but for those which hit the maximum you can not do much and that can cause this kind of posterization. This effect might increase with high ISO as with higher ISO the manageable subject contrast range decreases. That your D700 can handle this is probably because in terms of dynamic range the D700 is a monster compared to 2004 tech built into the R-D1.
Cheers
Ruediger
Cheers
Ruediger
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
ISO 800 and I've just gone back and checked on some photos a took a couple of weeks ago also under artificial light and they're the same but not quite as bad. They were at ISO 1600.
This is one of the pics from then. I hadn't notice the effect around her neckline because I converted the image to black and white before making any other adjustments!
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I understand that the dynamic range of the sensor is limited so I shouldn't expect too much but why the pink blowout in the over exposed areas under artificial lighting but not if if I overexpose in natural light? I checked an image I'd taken in a darkened room a couple of weeks ago where the light from a window was deliberately blown out (as I'd expected) but it was colour neutral ... not pink. Or is that to do with the base colour of the subject material ... ie skin?
back alley
IMAGES
i have never seen that before...i shoot at 800 often.
ruediger
Member
I think it has to do with both, the quality of light and the subject material. The spectrum of an artificial light may be pretty odd compared to natural light. So it might also be the case that the raw converter had to push white balance to the edge and that may also cause such kind of behavior. But I must admit, I never saw it THAT drastically as in your image. What is probably worth a try is to play around a bit with the white balance and see if the tonal values - although not color correct - come back into place. Then you may be able to do at least a b&W conversion without posterization.
Cheers
Ruediger
Sparrow
Veteran
... perhaps it's a temperature thing, and it was just too cool at the time 
...
... I'll get my coat now
...... I'll get my coat now
roundg
Well-known
What raw software did you use ?
Have you check jpg from the camera ?
Have you check jpg from the camera ?
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
... perhaps it's a temperature thing, and it was just too cool at the time
... I'll get my coat now
You couldn't resist that could you!
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I'm using ACDSee Pro and I don't have a jpeg as the camera's set for raw output only. You can see it on the LCD when reviewing though and I gather that's a jpeg generated in the camera.
I think it was the lighting ... these lights they use at QUT are pretty intense and play havock with the white balance on the D700.
Sparrow
Veteran
... it was difficult; I must admit
gavinlg
Veteran
Keith I think you may still have my email address - feel free to send me one of the raw files and I'll put it through aperture/lightroom and see if it does the same if you like.
astro8
Well-known
Never seen anything out of mine even approaching that.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Thanks Gav .... I'll send it in the morning.
Actually I just remembered I have Lightroom 2 on my computer and I checked the images .... they're fine!
So the problem is the raw converter in ACDSee Pro ... bloody hell that's my favorite post processing software!
I won't send that in the morning then!
Spyro
Well-known
other than that they look good in terms of sharpness, noise and oof areas
enjoy your camera keith
enjoy your camera keith
FrankS
Registered User
I'm so satisfied with my M2.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I'm so satisfied with my M2.
Bloody digital madness Frank.
Guess I'll just have to get used to using Lightroom .... I think ACDSee Pro only supports ERF files in the later versions and I'm still using Pro 3. We are now up to Pro 5 but I'm too cheap to upgrade!