Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰
Photo Analysis
What causes the shine?
Page <prev 2 of 2
Mar 13, 2012 11:09:23   #
richnash46 Loc: Texas
 
alienmurphy wrote:
Most of my photos look like they have been dusted with glitter or pixie dust. It this what is meant by noise? How do I fix/avoid it?

At this time I am not concerned about background/distractions.

This is driving me nuts. Thank you in advance.

PS - Photos taken with my Canon XTI and my Canon 50D have the same problem. Sigma 30mm f/1.4 on the XTI and 50D. Canon 50mm f/1.8 on the T2i.

I went back and was looking at other photos. None taken without flash have this problem. Most of the problem ones were taken with built in flash. A few taken with the 430EX II have this problem. Most do not. So is it the flash?
Most of my photos look like they have been dusted ... (show quote)


Clearly you need to go out and replace all this Canon stuff with Nikon gear! :)

Reply
Mar 13, 2012 11:18:39   #
PNagy Loc: Missouri City, Texas
 
alienmurphy wrote:
Most of my photos look like they have been dusted with glitter or pixie dust. It this what is meant by noise? How do I fix/avoid it?

At this time I am not concerned about background/distractions.

This is driving me nuts. Thank you in advance.

PS - Photos taken with my Canon XTI and my Canon 50D have the same problem. Sigma 30mm f/1.4 on the XTI and 50D. Canon 50mm f/1.8 on the T2i.

I like your shots, and like Snowbear, do not see the noise. Nor do I see random lighting anywhere, if that is what you meant by "shine."

I went back and was looking at other photos. None taken without flash have this problem. Most of the problem ones were taken with built in flash. A few taken with the 430EX II have this problem. Most do not. So is it the flash?
Most of my photos look like they have been dusted ... (show quote)

Reply
Mar 13, 2012 11:25:50   #
marcomarks Loc: Ft. Myers, FL
 
alienmurphy wrote:
Most of my photos look like they have been dusted with glitter or pixie dust. It this what is meant by noise? How do I fix/avoid it?

At this time I am not concerned about background/distractions.

This is driving me nuts. Thank you in advance.

PS - Photos taken with my Canon XTI and my Canon 50D have the same problem. Sigma 30mm f/1.4 on the XTI and 50D. Canon 50mm f/1.8 on the T2i.

I went back and was looking at other photos. None taken without flash have this problem. Most of the problem ones were taken with built in flash. A few taken with the 430EX II have this problem. Most do not. So is it the flash?
Most of my photos look like they have been dusted ... (show quote)


If you're talking about the tiny little white dots near the eyes or along eyelids of these subjects I suggest that it's just the strong flash reflecting off of moisture almost like the sparkles from sunlight you get off of a wavy or rippling body of water. I get those eye glistens (and tooth glistens too) occasionally but remove them in editing, not blame my camera.

I'd say it's mostly because you're using on-camera built in flash. If the flash was above, or to the side of, the camera on a bracket, I suspect this wouldn't happen. You might also try a $5.00 plastic diffuser from eBay that mounts in your hotshoe, holds a translucent plastic piece in front of the flash, and softens the blast. Or even just a thin piece of single layer toilet paper taped across the front of the flash.

Reply
 
 
Mar 13, 2012 11:37:17   #
Lucian Loc: From Wales, living in Ohio
 
tkhphotographer..

There is nothing exceptional about the little girl image at all, regarding the hand held 60th of a second at 800ISO.

That is shot with flash and anyone can have it look sharp, even at 30th or 20th because the ambient light is dark enough that the only image being exposed is what the flash is showing you.

That flash is going off at well over 1000th of second, therefore the shutter speed is irrelevent as is the fact it was hand held.

Now if this was a slow shutter speed and without flash and looked like that, then that would be an exceptional feat.

By the way I see nothing wrong with your images so it must be your monitor, or computer setting with that monitor. I did see what you meant though in the blueish image of the dog.

Reply
Mar 13, 2012 13:46:33   #
flyguy Loc: Las Cruces, New Mexico
 
rpavich wrote:
alienmurphy wrote:
snowbear wrote:
I still don't see anything unusual. Can you draw a circle around the area, or is it something that is over the entire image?


Something in 'rpavich' response gave me an idea. I checked a couple of the photos on another computer/laptop and shine is not there. I have a laptop and I see the same thing in my editing software and Firefox and IE on my computer. Laptop, can't calibrate.

Thanks for the input. Now if I can just figure out how to get around this with my display.

I did look up the definition of noise and that is why I was going crazy. Def did not sound like noise.

Thanks to everyone who replied. It's still weird that only flash photos display this way.
quote=snowbear I still don't see anything unusual... (show quote)


There is nothing wrong with your shots...trust me. It's the display medium...

I just checked your shot in firefox and internet explorer...both did NOT display the shine until the photo was completely compressed in the browser.

I opened the shot up in Lightroom and of course..the shot is fine...nothing wrong.


Do this test...shrink the shot and repost...email size...and you'll see that there really isn't anything wrong with the picture itself.

Its not weird that it's flash shots...it's what you'd expect...lots of tiny specular highlights...
quote=alienmurphy quote=snowbear I still don't s... (show quote)


Opening the image in Lightroom may have by-passed the effect that is being produced for the questioner because Lightroom automatically applies some default settings for sharpening and noise reduction to your images.

Look in the detail panel of the develop module and you'll see under sharpening a default setting of 25 is applied and underneath that in the noise reduction setting color is set to 25 and detail is set to 50, turn this off by setting the sliders to zero and then see what it looks like.

Hope this helps.

Reply
Mar 13, 2012 13:53:00   #
alienmurphy Loc: Alaska
 
Lucian wrote:

By the way I see nothing wrong with your images so it must be your monitor, or computer setting with that monitor. I did see what you meant though in the blueish image of the dog.


I took that photo (the one that came out bluish) so that folks could see what I see on my computer). Glad to know that at least one other person can see what I am talking about. There does not appear to be anything I can do about the monitor. I've tried......

Reply
Mar 13, 2012 14:49:13   #
Moirish Loc: San Diego
 
By the way, the dog is a scene stealer - what a cutie!

Reply
 
 
Mar 13, 2012 20:55:53   #
pebo111 Loc: Eastern Oregon (Pendleton)
 
Hay I think you have some other problem. I down loaded you pictures and in three different programs I never saw any thing wrong with any one of the pictures.

Sorry I dont have any suggestions but they look good to me.

Reply
Mar 13, 2012 21:00:23   #
Meives Loc: FORT LAUDERDALE
 
[quote=alienmurphy]
I have the specs on your first dog picture. The ISO of 400 should not be too high.



Reply
Mar 14, 2012 00:21:36   #
wsmethers Loc: Cody, Wyoming
 
Looking at it full size on my Acer tablet was fine full size no sparkles at all just a fine photo. Something to be said for droids.
alienmurphy wrote:
Most of my photos look like they have been dusted with glitter or pixie dust. It this what is meant by noise? How do I fix/avoid it?

At this time I am not concerned about background/distractions.

This is driving me nuts. Thank you in advance.

PS - Photos taken with my Canon XTI and my Canon 50D have the same problem. Sigma 30mm f/1.4 on the XTI and 50D. Canon 50mm f/1.8 on the T2i.

I went back and was looking at other photos. None taken without flash have this problem. Most of the problem ones were taken with built in flash. A few taken with the 430EX II have this problem. Most do not. So is it the flash?
Most of my photos look like they have been dusted ... (show quote)

Reply
Mar 19, 2012 06:50:36   #
vislp Loc: Level Pebble
 
Perhaps a cheap monitor? It takes a pretty high quality monitor to view a photo. I just bought a $500.00 monitor not long ago. After using a $120.00 monitor for so long, it blew me away the difference in the way my photos looked.

Just a suggestion. Not saying this is your problem.

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 2
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Photo Analysis
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use | DMCA
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.