Unwanted "bands" in skies

I am new to digital photography. I have noticed in images featuring open skies

unwanted bands crossing the image. In the accompanying image, the band, or

line, reddish in color, crosses the entire sky, from left to right, just above

the top of the rock formation. I have noticed this effect both on the monitor

and in prints in more than one photograph. What causes this effect? How can I

correct it? I use a d70, shoot jpeg, and use the simplest enhancement tools on

elements 2. Thanks. Bill<div></div>

Are you using a filter of some kind on the lens when you shoot?

Jpeg compression or posterization from doing edits to compressed 8-bit files? Try shooting raw and using higher quality jpegs.

This is what happens when you edit 8 bit files. As Roger says: shoot raw. And then import as

16 bit files. (Doesn't seem like an Elements 2 job to me, but at least you know what to look

for.)

Eric,

When you say it doesn't seem like an elements 2 job, what do you mean? Can I shoot in raw mode and edit raw files in elements 2? As I said, I am a beginner in digital photography. Would another software application be better for editing raw files? Which suitable software would be most user-friendly for a beginner? A part of me wants to avoid having to learn anything new as far as digital photograhy goes, for I am generally interested in traditional b&w photography, but I do carry a digital camera and results like the image I posted seem unacceptable to me. Thanks for your replies. Bill

Hi Bill. Were the bands there before editing? If not, then it's probably a case of over boosting levels, for example. I understand that the newer versions of Elements allow you to edit in raw. Raw files can take more extreme boosting before things such as bands appear. Learning a bit more about digital editing might help you with shots such as yours above: You could learn how to edit the sky and the ground separately, possibly, in this case, brightening the ground while leaving the sky alone.

What you see is an insufficient number of levels, either because of your exposure, or because of editing (typically in 8 bit format) afterwards. Shooting in raw and working in 16 bits could help a bit, but not if there is not information captured during the exposure.

Bill!

 

The reason I asked if you where using a filter is, I had this same problem when I used my old Cokin A series film filters that I had for years on my digital, and they would cause this effect, I replaced them with a new set of P series and had no more problems, there was something in the coating of the old filters that just didn't agree with some digital sensors!

First of all, I apologize to you, Ken, for not responding to your question about filters. I have attached a B+W uv multicoated filter to the lens. I have not experimented with the effect of this filter on the images by shooting shots both with and without it.

 

Thanks to the others for their input. I suspect, without knowing for sure, that the problem lies in my use of jpeg format, which seems like the easiest mode for a beginner to use. To edit the files, I use "quick fix" in photoshop elements 2, again following the path of least resistance.

 

To achieve acceptable results in digital photography, I think I am going to have to take the next step--for me, it would be learning about shooting in raw mode and editing files using more sophisticated software. A "beginner" course would be ideal for me. I have twenty-plus years of amateur experience in film photography and darkroom. I feel sure I would "catch on" quickly.

 

Thanks again to all.

 

Bill

 

P.S.

 

For the heck of it, I am attaching the color version of the picture posted above, in which the "band" is less apparent (if apparent at all!). Hmmm.<div></div>

Bill!

 

I shoot most of my shots in jpeg fine setting which is at 6 megapixel on my Fuji S2 pro, "mostly because the in camera processing of this camera is great, right out of the thing" and have never had this problem you are having just because of shooting jpeg, and for the longest time I was using the very first edition of Photoshop Elements, and it does appear that in your original that you posted, the color band is not present, so it may just be in your method of execution in processing the image!

 

I was like you, a film user of some thirty odd years before picking up a digital camera, or using a computer for that matter "the thing was just to darn foreign to me" there is a large learning curve that has to take place, before you can expect really good results from this new fangled electronic medium, but once you start getting the hang of it, its a snap, and you will find yourself saying, "well" this isn't as hard as I thought it would be, and "Ha" so thats how they do that, and so on, at times its been frustrating to say the least, but like anything, taking it one step at a time so that it don't overwhelm you, your photos will start looking much better, and you will find yourself starting to have fun with it and loving it!

 

Good luck!

 

Ken.

"Eric, When you say it doesn't seem like an elements 2 job, what do you mean?"

 

Well, I'm not Eric, but I believe what he means is that PS Elements may not be capable of editing 16-bit files. I have PSE 4, and the toolset is very limited in what you can do to a 16-bit file. Clone is out, burn/dodge is out, blur/sharpen tool is out, etc.

 

There are capable 16-bit editors out there that are less costly than the full-blown PS CS2/3. One that has some enthusiastic followers is Picture Window Pro.

Ken,

 

Do you still shoot in jpeg mode? If so, what sort of editing, if any, do you do? Color correction? Brightness and contrast? Sharpening? If not--if you shoot in raw mode--do you notice a difference in image quality?

 

Like you, I shoot in jpeg fine mode to get the best possible image.

I have been converting the files to sepia in nikon pictureproject and editing--quick fixing--the pictureproject version in photoshop elements. Maybe if I stick with the color version, or convert to b&w or sepia in ps elements, I will avoid the "banding" problem.

 

Thanks for your response.

 

Bill

"Like you, I shoot in jpeg fine mode to get the best possible image. "

 

Shoot RAW to get the best possible image and consider an easy to use program like Adobe Lightroom to process your raw files, tint, etc while avoiding banding from making severe changes to jpegs.

 

Lightroom is a steal for $199 as it is very powerful but also simple to understand.

Thanks to all for the helpful responses to my questions. I have heard about lightroom--can't remember where--and will check it out. Bill

Sorry Bill, had to step out for a bit!

 

It depends, under normal circumstances when I am just walking around doing just general for my self fun photography I shoot jpeg, but if the lighting is a challenge or if I am doing a portrait and want to get good skin tones, I will shoot RAW, but I don't find it necessary to religiously shoot raw, as the camera in general does a good job of everything on its own, its like any tool, you need to learn its limitations and abilities, then judge for yourself what you need to do from there!

 

On any photo whether I am shooting jpeg or RAW then converting to jpeg, once I have it in photoshop, I just do some basic editing starting with levels, color balance, selective color if needed, contrast and then unsharp mask, all done very moderately and using layers!

I should have also mentioned, if you are still finding color banding in your photos, there is a program out there thats called "Band Aid" it does a wonderful job of correcting this, there is a free trial version that you can download and give a try, also another product that I use, to give my photos that finished smooth look after I have finished all other editing is, I use "Neat image" its a photoshop filter plugin, that I have found that I just can't do without!

 

Oh, I use photoshop CS for my editing if you where wondering!

 

Hope some of this helps!

 

Ken.

Just thought I would give it a try with your photo, I even added sepia a little heavy to see what it would look like and ran it through Neat image, and this is what I came up with!

 

The bands where there in your original image, after putting it in photoshop and enlarging it by 200%, it looks like you have streaks running across your sensor from a not so clean cleaning, do you use sensor swabs to clean it?<div></div>

"Would another software application be better for editing raw files? Which suitable software

would be most user-friendly for a beginner?"

 

Yes, Adobe Photoshop Lightroom or when you're on a Mac, Apple Aperture is another option

next to Lightroom. Not sure where you heard of Lightroom before? Try a Google search only

within Photo.net. I got nearly a thousand hits.

Great information. Thanks.

 

Ken, your version of the Cathedral Rock picture looks just about perfect. How did you eliminate the band in the sky? I have never touched the sensor; in fact, I have never removed the lens since buying camera and lens. Perhaps I need to have a professional clean the sensor. The original owner of the camera, I've used it for about two years.

 

As it turns out, Adobe offers a free trial for LightRoom. I read a detailed, informative review of the software on Luminous Landscape. Lightroom looks just right for me. I think I will accept the offer of a free 30-day trial.

 

Thanks again to everyone.

 

Bill

If your sensor hasn't been cleaned since it left the factory, its very possible that the factory left smears on it, this was a problem on a lot of cameras, once the owner got it, he would have to do a cleaning right out of the box!

 

You can clean it yourself if you feel capable and steady handed enough, the first time doing it is a bit scary, they sell sensor swabs and cleaning kits for this purpose, I do mine on average of at least once a month, but I am always changing lenses and use my camera daily, one of the best products on the market for cleaning the sensor is Eclipse cleaning fluid and Pec pads, or an equivalent pre made swab and Eclipse, I also use Eclipse to clean my lenses and filters, does a great job!

Bill, your in an area that historically produces banding or stairstepping. Much depends on what color space you take the file with, which you process in and the the convertion. I note that you converted to a "Nikon sRGB" color space and one I'm not familiar with. Your photo, sky area, contains a lot of data that is out of the Gamut range and won't be expressed when you convert to a smaller color space. First thing you need to do when down sampling is to choose "perceptual", PS will attempt to express in a way that helps to perceive it as smooth. The next trick used is to add a little noise, sort of goes against the grain.<P>I'm enclosing your photo after I used "gamut warning" and it shows (red) all of the area that has tones/colors outside of the color space range to be reproduced as an sRGB image = banding.<P>Hope this helps a little, Dave<div></div>

This image, I've corrected the Gamut of the sky.<div></div>

Now, when you apply filters there won't be any banding or color steps.

Sorry, this is the flattened version.<div></div>

Thanks for your comments and suggestions, Dave. I have to admit that you are out of my depth in talking about the problem of banding, its causes and effects.

 

I recently downloaded a trial version of adobe lightroom. In the past, I have shot in the jpg fine setting. Today, I selected RAW format. Are there other things I can do in-camera to reduce the possibilty of banding? Are there things in can do in lightroom to avoid or eliminate the problem? I think lightroom offers a choice of two color spaces, rgb and pro-rgb (hope I got that right). Is one color space preferable to the other?

 

I have years of amateur b&w darkroom experience; I feel sure I will catch on to what seems like the parallel world of digital "lightroom" in time. Thanks again.

 

Bill