Clear sky mottling

my new power shot 610 seems to have some mottling in clear blue sky areas.

 

I saw a pic at a Canon demo a customer brought in made with a digi Rebel.

Someone posted a close up portrait this week or last where there pinkish

mottling on the skin areas. He said it looked like randomly applied rouge.

 

Are these a digital artifact, something unique to Canon, or the result of

sharpening and/or unsharp mask, or something else I do not understand?

 

As far as I am concerned, film is better if this is what happens.

Ronald, without actual examples, the vague nature of your post leaves nothing to go on.

I can put up a small sample. Look for the magenta streaks in the sky.

They are very subtle and have random irregular borders. The digi Rebel exhibited the same. Unfortunately it need to be large to be easily seen and I can`t not enlarge it from here.<div></div>

A small example? That's about gotta be 100% isn't it? To tell you the truth I don't see anything odd in the sky (I'm at work on an uncalibrated monitor though). If you have to blow it up over 100% to see it I don't think I'd be too concerned with it.

 

Better then grainy skies in 4X6 prints with film. :)

 

Alan

Your mention of USM -- is this image out of the camera or is it post-processed?

 

Noise reduction might produce mottling, for example.

 

Post a portion of the image at magnification that shows the effect, preferrably out-of-camera and not pp'ed, and the in-camera processing settings.

 

--

Don E

The effect is clearly visable at work. I sent the file to myself and opened it.

 

At home here I can not see the problem on either the sharpened image or the original. It must must be the monitor at work as I can`t see it at home or in the attachment above I put up at work but viewed at home, but it is definately visable on the work monitor.

 

This will be a mystery!

<<As far as I am concerned, film is better if this is what happens.>>

 

I think your differences in monitors is a good example of how drawing conclusions from anecdotal evidence can be dangerous. He said/she said twice-removed is no substitue for rigerous testing. The changes that can cause problems in film photography (temperture, chemicals, improper developing, aged film, x-rays, etc etc.) have simply shifted to monitor color calibration, post-processing techniques, printing, etc.

what a coincidence... I was processing RAW files from a 20D today, and that exact pinkish skin blotch made an appearance. It happened on an image that was accidentally underexposed by about 2 stops. Perhaps the RAW converter's attempt to correct the exposure produced the artifact.

I think I can see what you're talking about, but it is subtle. Maybe jpeg artifacts, maybe the in-camera processing. Hard to say but I don't think you'd be able to see it on a print, and it looks MUCH better than irregular clumps of film dye on even a 100 speed film. If it really bothers you, select the sky and do a gaussian blur on it.

I think I can see what you're talking about, but it is subtle. Maybe jpeg artifacts, maybe the in-camera processing. Hard to say but I don't think you'd be able to see it on a print, and it looks MUCH better than irregular clumps of film dye on even a 100 speed film. If it really bothers you, select the sky and do a gaussian blur on it.