On 5/7/2012 4:39 PM, usher99@xxxxxxx wrote:
> DXOMark has ways to pick up "pre-processing. " I think Panny early on
> did this fairly extensively. Some noise reduction can be done/removing
> dead or stuck pixels but fancier stuff would be nice to know about or
> even the noise reduction so trade-offs of the photog choice can be
> made.
> Wonder why there is noise in the corner shadows at base ISO brought up
> only one stop ?
The 60D is much the same. smaller sensors have made great strides, and may look
noise free at base ISO, but it ain't
true in the shadows as yet.
> Perhaps the vignetting was reduced before you knew about.
Now that would be wrong, as would other lens corrections, in a Raw file.
Distortion correction is great for many uses,
but it tends to blur detail in the moved areas. At least that's what I found
when I tested. It also makes logical sense.
> Not saying fixing this stuff is bad, just it would be nice to know about it
> and adjust it as desired.
Yes, it would be, is, if it's happening. Pixels shouldn't be moved around,
stretched and compressed laterally in a Raw
file. They start doing that, and I'll join AG's camp.
Keep It Straight Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|