Famous "Banding" from the Nikon D7100!
Dec 14, 2020 12:36:17 #
yorkiebyte wrote:
Different programs interpret severely underexposed parts of images differently. This is not a "camera" issue but a photographer one. I would expose normally, to avoid severe underexposure, then make adjustments in post processing to get the look you want. This is not B&W negative film, where I might do as you did - measure the shadows, and expose for them by introducing a negative exposure bias, enough to put the tonal values in a proper relationship to the rest of the image, but not so much that you would not record anything those shadows, which would appear as clear areas on the negative. There is nothing wrong with your camera, sensor or anything else - other than you exposure and processing decisions.
Dec 14, 2020 13:09:40 #
Gene51 wrote:
Different programs interpret severely underexposed... (show quote)
Thank you, Gene51! Indeed a poor choice of settings by me on the camera itself. Plus the fact that it's JPEG rather than a RAW image.
~ I'm guessing a RAW image would have had the spunk to pull this off much better?
Dec 14, 2020 13:55:03 #
yorkiebyte wrote:
Thank you, Gene51! Indeed a poor choice of settings by me on the camera itself. Plus the fact that it's JPEG rather than a RAW image.
~ I'm guessing a RAW image would have had the spunk to pull this off much better?
~ I'm guessing a RAW image would have had the spunk to pull this off much better?
You're welcome.
Shooting raw combined with biasing the exposure to the highlights without overexposing them should help. Jpegs are notoriously difficult to wrestle with when you have wide dynamic range images.
With my Nikon D810, I can measure a highlight where I still want detail and add 2 stops to the reading and the shadows get a little more exposure, and the highlights get as much as they can without blowing them out. When in Lightroom, I push the shadow slider pretty aggressively towards lightening them, and I knock down the highlight slider until they look "ok" - I may fool a bit with a curves adjustment in the event the midtones are too dark.
Dec 14, 2020 20:30:31 #
I "see" the problem! Too much time on all yall's hands. I use a laptop and I see and like these photos very much! I owned a D7100 and loved it. I gave it to my sister-in-law when I picked up my D500. And, believe me, I gave her some severe warnings about newborns in low light causing "banding". And I told her I would repossess it if she let it happen
Rediculous!.
Rediculous!.
Dec 15, 2020 08:24:15 #
Retired CPO wrote:
I "see" the problem! Too much time on all yall's hands. I use a laptop and I see and like these photos very much! I owned a D7100 and loved it. I gave it to my sister-in-law when I picked up my D500. And, believe me, I gave her some severe warnings about newborns in low light causing "banding". And I told her I would repossess it if she let it happen
Rediculous!.
Rediculous!.
Thank you, Retired CPO!! Too Much Time on my Hands with Styx and 'Stones!! Indeed, I do worry about weird stuff now that I'm newly retired... like I still get up at the same time to go to work that I don't have!!
~ However, what's nice here on UHH is finding solutions to a known problem from a certain camera and learning that with some forethought and caution on my part, I can mostly avoid it next time!! ..... Whooohoo!!
Dec 15, 2020 08:43:45 #
Gene51 wrote:
You're welcome. br br Shooting raw combined with ... (show quote)
I told myself (before I retired at the end of the last school year) that I need to learn the ins and outs of RAW shooting. Well, now would be a good time!! Plus getting back to my knowledge from film days about exposure and film/print manipulation, i.e., what works and what doesn't. (Then: what Sells and what Doesn't!)
~ I'm finding, as many of you have already, that letting the wonderous computer of a camera decide everything is not all it's cracked up to be! Being lazy is not achieving!
Thanks again, Gene51.
Dec 15, 2020 11:12:37 #
Consider me another who is totally underwhelmed by the problem in these images....in fact, I'm still looking for objectionable content.
Maybe I need my eyes checked...oh wait...did that last month!
Maybe I need my eyes checked...oh wait...did that last month!
Dec 15, 2020 11:30:13 #
fotobyferg wrote:
Consider me another who is totally underwhelmed by the problem in these images....in fact, I'm still looking for objectionable content.
Maybe I need my eyes checked...oh wait...did that last month!
Maybe I need my eyes checked...oh wait...did that last month!
Thank you, fotobyferg!! No worries!! These images will not be printed over 5"x7" per my daughter. At that, they will certainly be fine.
~ The banding problem in these images are compounded by my lack of attention as to how I had the camera (Nikon D7100) set to take this type of image. It was set up quick and dirty without thought as to the outcome. It was a reaction to seeing the backlight on my grandsons head/face.
~ So, all in all, the images turned out fine for what I intended, albeit not very good technically.
Dec 15, 2020 14:51:39 #
Dec 15, 2020 15:53:36 #
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.