arthuryeo Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 <p>I would like to hear your opinions about the cause of the graininess in the bokeh (the defocused areas). Is it the lens, the sensor, onboard processing, thinner low-pass filter, combination of these or something else?</p> <p><a href="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3498/3975316059_4327e78662_o.jpg"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3498/3975316059_c491733459.jpg" alt="" /> </a> <br /> D3; 50mm/1.4G; ISO 200; f/2.2<br /> Click on image to see a larger version</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
von_tsotren Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 <p>Sorry, but I don't see any "graininess". :) Any clearer than that and the image would be plastic.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liljuddakalilknyttphotogra Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 <p>Arthur, I think you'll have to post a larger version of the shot. This way I can't see any graininess in the shot either.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cc_chang2 Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 <p>I only see nick bokeh. Nice shot!</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthuryeo Posted October 3, 2009 Author Share Posted October 3, 2009 <p>>Arthur, I think you'll have to post a larger version of the shot. This way I can't see any graininess in the shot either.</p> <p>Lil,<br> Did you try to click on the image to get a larger version or was the larger version still too small? Just wondering?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthuryeo Posted October 3, 2009 Author Share Posted October 3, 2009 <p>>Sorry, but I don't see any "graininess". :) Any clearer than that and the image would be plastic.</p> <p>OK, may be I shouldn't say "graininess" but do you guys think you have seen smoother/creamier bokeh? Why would it be plasticky if it is smoother?</p> <p>Raise your hand and focus your eyes on it. Does the defocused background have such a "grains"? Since we are humans, I am using the eyes as the ultimate "camera" system as a reference.</p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthuryeo Posted October 3, 2009 Author Share Posted October 3, 2009 <p>I have a theory: large pixel wells (as in the D3 and D700) is revolutionary in terms of high ISO performance but in lower ISO situation, it may have "roughened" the bokeh quite a bit. Does this idea has any technical soundness?<br /></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 <p>I don't see any "grain" or noise. The sample photo is too small to reveal that kind of detail, including the larger version on Flickr.</p> <p>You may be seeing the effects of degradation due to editing and JPEG compression. Compare your full resolution raw files against full resolution JPEGs (whether taken in camera or produced from raw). If you don't see any "grain" in the raw file, it's not a problem with the lens, camera, sensor or bokeh. But it may be gremlins.</p> <p>Also, it's probably better to choose an area of continuous or near-continuous color or tone for evaluating noise or "grain". A blue sky is perfect for this. A busy out of focus background is not.</p> <p>Nitpicking, but... how can you have "graininess in bokeh"? Isn't that like saying "I have sandy in my wet"? Or "I have brushiness in my chiaroscuro," if you subscribe to the notion that usage of the word bokeh is the photographer's equivalent to chiaroscuro. Granted, it's an invented word anyway and a peculiar conceit of obsessive photographers. But let's at least agree on usage. Otherwise future generations will know for certain that we are all absolute weenies.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oskar_ojala Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 <p>I don't see the "grain", but typically noise is much easier to see in areas with little luminance variation rather than areas with small high contrast detail.<br> To solve the problem, buy a bigger camera. I don't really get this problem with say 4x5" or most of the time even 6x6.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_hinkey Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 <p>Although I can't see it in the small image size, I know what you mean. From my experience I notice the noise in the smooth, out of focus areas because they are just that - smooth areas. Portions of the image that have detail tend to hide the noise because it's not as noticeable. <br> John</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dansutton Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 <p>too be honest i just see some harsh, not too pleasant bokeh. do you mean film grain or noise? the blur should take care of that. otherwise, i guess i don't see what you mean. i just don't care for the bokeh on nikon's 50's.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric friedemann Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 <p>I'm currently viewing a Dell 24-inch ultra-sharp monitor. With my reading glasses on, if a stare too close at either the small or slightly larger image, what is see is the pixelation of the screen, not grain/noise.</p> <p>That is to say, no matter how good your monitor is, IMHO, its not the best medium for judging grain/noise. If I were concerned about grain in your image, I'd make an 8x12 inch print, and would view the print in really good light.</p> <p>Beyond that, if you're concerned you've got a grain issue at ISO 200, try running the full-rez image through Noise Ninja or Neat Image. Then, A-B the noise-reduced image as against the image with noise reduction zeroed out.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark liddell Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 <p>It's a bit 'splodgy'. The way each lens renders out of focus areas is different and there is no way to predict it really.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthuryeo Posted October 3, 2009 Author Share Posted October 3, 2009 <p>Here's one version that was smoothened in PS/CS4 and feathered.<br> Do you see the difference, which I was alluding to?</p> <p><a href="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2579/3977273853_b618d7db85_o.jpg"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2579/3977273853_5d4490c25b.jpg" alt="" /> </a></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric_arnold Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 <blockquote> <p>do you guys think you have seen smoother/creamier bokeh?</p> </blockquote> <p>personally, i dont think the nikon 50mm lenses are all that great for bokeh.however, it's possible that bokeh becomes smoother on that particular lens at 2.8, as photozone and dpreview tests seem to indicate. so you may have to stop down a bit to get more 'cream' from that particular lens.</p> <p>in your image, i see a nicely defocused image with extremely narrow DoF. it's a nice shot which only loses quality when you start nitpicking it to death. i dont see grain per se, but i do see the OoF elements struggling a bit with nervousness, though not as bad as the 50/1.8.</p> <p>if it is ultimate bokeh you are after, you'd obviously be better shooting with a 70-200, 85/1.4 or 135 DC. and though this may seem like sacrilege, i get better bokeh from the sigma 30/1.4--with a FF camera you may want to try the sigma 50/1.4 or the Voigtlander 58/1.4 MF as well.</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephen_asprey2 Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 <p>The 50/1.4 id not known for smooth bokeh. But these images are very nice anyway. You might have to use the 85/1.4,8 or the 105 and 135 DC to do better</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 <p>There's no "grain" or noise in either sample. You're referring to some other problem other than grain or noise. As far as I can tell you're referring to something about the perceived quality of the out of focus areas, not grain or noise. It's subjective. That's what bokeh is - it's entirely subjective.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcsharp Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 <p>It looks like the bokeh has been sharpened along with the rest of the image. If shot in RAW, then look at the RAW image to see if it has that look to it. If it was shot in JPEG, then you may need to adjust the settings in your camera to decrease the amount of sharpening that is applied.<br> When you sharpen your images in post processing, you do not have to apply the sharpening to the entire image. You can use layers in Photoshop, or NIK Software has a great application to apply the sharpening only to selected areas.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oistrakh Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 <p>Looks like posterization or banding, more like an artifact of JPG, than actual grain or noise.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjm photo Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 <p>I think Marc is on the right track - the sharpening has contributed much to the bokeh "coming apart". What does the unmolested image look like? Try selective sharpening of only the in focus area as was suggested. I'd like to see the difference.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marekd Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 <p>Arthur, this type of bokeh is typical to bright prime lenses. A lot of people love it and try to achieve it. If you want smoother bokeh try stopping down the aperture to f/4 or smaller. Although I may be wrong on that, but I believe the wider open the lens is the more your bokeh will look like that. Nikon 70-200 2.8 is known for what you call smooth bokeh, but I personally don't like it as much as for example Canon's 135 f/2 @ f/2<br> I may be all wrong on all that, so let us know if you try to test your bokeh at different apertures..</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhooru Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 <p>You can also sharpen, and then use the history brush. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthuryeo Posted October 4, 2009 Author Share Posted October 4, 2009 <p>>It looks like the bokeh has been sharpened along with the rest of the image.<br> No, I have selectively sharpened them in NX for the first one and PS/CS4 in the smoothened second one.</p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthuryeo Posted October 4, 2009 Author Share Posted October 4, 2009 <p>Marek said:</p> <blockquote> <p>I may be all wrong on all that, so let us know if you try to test your bokeh at different apertures..</p> </blockquote> <p>I will try with smaller aperture.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthuryeo Posted October 4, 2009 Author Share Posted October 4, 2009 <p>Let me include a 100% version straight from the RAW...</p> <p><a href="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2430/3979651217_c92b02fa1f_o.jpg"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2430/3979651217_c7be7f396e.jpg" alt="" /> </a><br> Click on the image to see the full size crop. Do you notice some rough fuzziness in the North, NE, E and South peripheral areas of the frame? If you still can't see it then move your head to different angles and you will eventually see it. What I am looking at are the individual "grain", dots or whatever you want to call it.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now