Moire, finally!

<p>I have been reading about moire for 7 years now. Which cameras are more susceptible? The D800E vs. the D800. AA filters, no AA filters, Weak AA filters. Yet I felt left out of the conversation. 3 dslr's and 3 p&s's later I had never been able to capture "the moire". Was I doing something wrong? Today that all came to an end, I got it. It took my P7700 and a lucky shot but I got it. Here's the photo, check out the wicker chair.</p>

<p>Shot in Raw, processed in Lightroom.</p><div></div>

<p>Does this show up on a print, or only on the monitor? Murray</p>

<p>"When you shoot fine detail and the prints make you quail it's a moire..."</p>

<p>Phil, Was that pattern visible to your eye; do you recall? Somehow I have a suspicion that it is not moiré. I have seen (with my eye, that is) similar patterns on similar woven chairs.</p>

<p>Les, I'm still humming the tune. LOL.</p>

<p>Its there in the chair, but its also on the top center portion on the water, if you notice there's a cross hatch pattern in the water.</p>

<p>I can believe the chair moire. Their curvy shape, in blue/yellow, kinda conforms to the narrowing angles of the receding cane lines.</p>

<p>.....of course, it could be a hippy '70s Moire Sun Lounger Cover!</p>

<p>Can't see the water ones....not sure 'wild' water should be able to make such a precise regular pattern to create interference patterns with a sensor chip?</p>

<p>Phil: Congratulations, your lens is sharp! :-) I had my first occurrence in about a year of D800E ownership recently with some repeating fine detail on and around the Anaheim Convention Center. The ACR tool for fixing it (when I found it) seemed effective.<br />

<br />

I could imagine that regular waves might invoke moire, but there's no way that the water at the top of this image is fine detail enough or in focus enough to have a problem; Don - you did zoom in, yes?<br />

<br />

Mike: Please donate your eyes to science, your cones may not be in a blue noise pattern. (Seeing interference patterns is normal; seeing <i>colour</i> interference patterns isn't.)<br />

<br/ >

Les: Thank you, that's genius.</p>

<p>Andrew, you don't see those stripes in colour? </p>

<p>The <em>BLUE</em> stripes are RGB 79.132.184. Maybe the WB is off? Interestingly, even if you set neutral WB off the white sailboard, its still RGB 110.130.160! (The difference in WB values between before and after is approx.+19.0.-20)</p>

<p>Or maybe it's painted/stained blue?...:-)</p>

<p>* Admittedly the Yellow ones are just less blue! A common optical illusion effect.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Mike: Um, no. Well, I do in the image, obviously, but I don't see a blue-and-white patterned real-world object acquiring yellow stripes when my eye runs out of resolution. In fact, I pretty much don't see anything but blur (or, in low light, noise) when the eye is struggling. It probably helps that my eyes wouldn't score very well in a lens test (I believe, after laser surgery, I have keratoconus, though I need to persuade an optician of that - not that <i>anyone's</i> eyes are all that good optically) - but mostly that I doubt my cones are in a regular pattern. I do see beating when there's interference between transparent objects (looking at a fence through another fence, for example), but, except where we're looking at the seat through the back of the chair, that's not what's going on here.</p>

<p>"When you shoot fine detail and the prints make you quail it's a moire..."</p>

<p>Could somebody please give Les "Dino" Berkley a kick(or a martini), please? Thanks.</p>

<p>Murray, I don't know, my poor printer has about 1/4 inch of dust on it. My iPad has basically replaced printing for me.</p>

<p>Les, like Andrew says, genius.</p>

<p>Mike B, I don't think it was visible but I could be wrong.</p>

<p>Don, I see what you mean, between the two sets of branches at the top, but I think the effect is natural.</p>

<p>Andrew, I thought of them as "in colour" also.</p>

<p>Mike H, yes the WB is off. I struggled with this one a bit. I initially took WB off the white board but I thought it warmed things up too much (10250). I eventually settled on shade (7500) which admittedly gave the board a blue cast but seemed a better balance overall.</p>

<p>Phil, not being natural is why I made the call. Water doesn't do that. There's a cross hatch pattern to it, that has a geometric effect not associated with the natural world.</p>

<p>Don I'm going to have to disagree with you on this one. I think it is just an effect of natural circumstances. Its a very small lake surrounded by trees, I think you are just seeing the result of winds blowing from two directions.</p>

<p>I guess this is the area and 'effect' were talking about.... I see moire!</p><div></div>

<p>Looks like an artistic simulation of moire by the chair designer...</p>

<p>Never knew Moire can be so exciting! LOL! LOL!</p>

<p>Congratulations!</p>

<p>Phil, it's just occurred to me....Doh! Is this the only shot you took and if not, was the camera on a tripod?</p>

<p>If you have others and it <em>wasn't</em> on a solid tripod, if it is moire, the pattern will change between shots due to the very slight rotational angle change between the sensor grid and the wicker mesh.</p>

<p>If you've moved and the pattern hasn't changed, it's a '70s hippy printed lounger cover!</p>