Any willing to help me these weird colored patches/blotches on the photo please ?

relic

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Oct 21, 2010
Messages
1,256
Location
North Carolina, USA
For what it may be worth: I edited your raw file in DxO PL2. Minimal luminance noise reduction but 100% (the default setting) chrominance NR, I tried adding some vibrance, quite a bit of shadow lightening, and some sharpening in order to try to accentuate the problem (at least that is what I intended). With my bad eyes, I don't see the color effects in your "RAW filter" image except for a strip of blue color (at least that is how I see it) along the right side. Perhaps you need to increase chrominance NR as has been indicated before. (Also, I must admit I don't know what the "RAW filter" is, so it may not be a reasonable question to ask but i will: could the RAW filter have accentuated the problem?)

_1050007_DxO.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Last edited:

Hendrik

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Feb 27, 2015
Messages
1,410
Location
Wayland MA
Real Name
Hendrik
I would be interested in a photo shot for the shadows from the same viewpoint. What just appears in the image as moiré could very well be a subtle pattern which, when lost in the shadows and dragged up in exposure, becomes noisy and cringeworthy, same as bikes and tiles in other captures. Note that the pattern that appears is oriented with the building NOT with the pixel grid. If this were the case then exposing (even further) to the right would be a reasonable strategy. If that didn’t do it, then HDR would be the proper solution.
 

MonikaO

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Sep 15, 2019
Messages
394
Location
Netherlands
Real Name
Monika
For what it may be worth: I edited your raw file in DxO PL2. Minimal luminance noise reduction but 100% (the default setting) chrominance NR, I tried adding some vibrance, quite a bit of shadow lightening, and some sharpening in order to try to accentuate the problem (at least that is what I intended). With my bad eyes, I don't see the color effects in your "RAW filter" image except for a strip of blue color (at least that is how I see it) along the right side. Perhaps you need to increase chrominance NR as has been indicated before. (Also, I must admit I don't know what the "RAW filter" is, so it may not be a reasonable question to ask but i will: could the RAW filter have accentuated the problem?)

View attachment 797659
@relic Raw filter is a filter in Photoshop cc. It has a lot of options simular to Lightroom.
Interesting to see your result :)
 
Last edited:

Brownie

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Sep 3, 2018
Messages
1,891
Location
SE Michigan
Real Name
Tim
@MonikaO I thought of one additional tip that came to mind after the earlier posts. Maybe it is something that you already know or maybe it's a bit too technical.. but hopefully, it will be of help to someone.

Lower ISO always results in less noise in the final image. If you know you need to recovery/brighten the shadows quite a bit it is especially important to keep noise to a minimum.
So if you know that you are going to want to recover dark/shadow areas it's best to keep ISO to it's lowest base setting (ISO 200 or ISO 100).

The ISO 200 is your camera's base ISO. The camera base ISO is the setting with the least amount of noise. Most camera's also have a "Low" setting (on the GX80 it's ISO 100). The "low" setting can come in handy if you need the maximum shadow recovery and are willing to "trade" recovery options in the highlights/brighter areas.

Low/IOS 100 is basically the same as the ISO 200 but with a shift in dynamic range (capturing more information without noise) to the darker/shadows at expense of less dynamic range in the white/bright areas. When shooting at Low/ISO 100 you simply capture more details in the shadows at the expense of the detail captured in the highlights vs the same image shot at ISO 200.

So:

ISO 200

Shadows Highlights
|------[ Dynamic range ]------|


ISO 100

Shadows Highlights
|--[ Dynamic range ]----------|


ISO 100 should be used intentionally in specific cases (trading highlight recovery capability for more shadow recovery) for all other shots ISO 200 would be the lowest ISO (resulting in overall the lowest amount of noise and well-balanced shadow/highlight recovery capabilities).
Use caution here. Panasonic cameras have a tendency to show bright highlights as magenta when shooting lower than the native 200 ISO. I experienced and fought it on both my G7 and G9, although much less pronounced on the G9.
 

Hendrik

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Feb 27, 2015
Messages
1,410
Location
Wayland MA
Real Name
Hendrik
I just found the raw and opened it in Adobe Camera Raw. I noticed that the file had some headroom before highlight clipping, but some of this must be attributable to ACR's conservative highlight treatment. It appears that the subtle pattern seen on the surface of the underside of the building that looks like moiré is actually the reflection of the building below it. It's so subtle that, if it is buried in the shadows and subsequently dragged up in exposure, it then becomes noisy and cringeworthy, same as bikes and tiles in other captures. It seems to me an architectural detail worth documenting. If this is the case then exposing to the right would be a reasonable strategy. If that still didn’t offer the dynamic range necessary to correctly render the surface, then HDR would be an effective solution.
 
Joined
Nov 21, 2015
Messages
285
Location
The Netherlands
Real Name
Roel
This is where I read it, it's from September 2019 by Robin Wong.

"Dealing with High ISO Shooting on Olympus OM-D Cameras

DO NOT USE SILENT SHUTTER

When shooting at high ISO, silent shutter will amplify the visible noise in the images
. I am not entirely sure why this is the case, but when silent shutter, or electronic shutter is engaged, the resulting image suffers more degradation, with higher amount of noise grains and artifacts in comparison to normal mechanical shutter use. Furthermore, in the shadow area of the image, there are ugly green color cast that appear as patches and blotches which are very difficult to correct or remove in post-processing. These ugly green blotches are not present when normal mechanical shutter is being used. I'd only advice to use the silent shutter when absolutely necessary - shooting a piano recital for example. In other cases when shutter sound is not a concern, using the normal mechanical shutter will ensure you better high ISO results."

https://robinwong.blogspot.com/2019/09/dealing-with-high-iso-shooting-on.html

Yes, silent shutter (using only the electric shutter and no mechanical moving shutter) has benefits: no shutter sound, can reach very high frames per second, no vibration which can blurr images and so on. But it also poses quite a few challenges for camera manufacturers.

With the electronic shutter the camera isn't turning the complete sensor on/off* but is taking the picture by taking the image line-by-line (each row/line of pixels is turned on/off individually to take the picture which takes longer than just on/off). This results in a few issues, mostly with movement in the image (called "focal plane distortion" when fast moving straight objects appear bent on the image) but also when shooting in LED/Fluorescent lights.

To counter this problem camera manufacturers need to speed up the readout speeds of the electronic shutter. They basically trade image quality (e.g. less dynamic range / more noise) to speed up the readout of the sensor and thus limit the impact of the problems introduced by only using a electronic shutter.

* this can be done and is called a "global shutter" but the technology isn't available in mirrorless/DSLR camera's. This due to the fact that a global shutter implementation blocks a lot of light limiting low-light performance (which would even be more limiting for the high-resolution sensors used in photo camera's. More pixels = smaller pixels, which are less capable of gathering light). The technology is available for pro videocamera's and traffic speed camera's (where high power flash and studio light can counter the lack of low-light performance of a global shutter).
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 21, 2015
Messages
285
Location
The Netherlands
Real Name
Roel
@roelwillems
Try reducing noise (luminance and colour) by 100% and these structures are still to be seen.
So I don't think this to be the cause. Noise usually shows everywhere in a photo, not just in one (here shadow) part. As far as I see there is absolutely no noise in the sky. To me it looks more like a moiré effect.
@Walter That's an interesting one! Although I do not see the fine details mostly responsible for moire in the picture, it could well be that the shadow recovery did some weird things to that part of the image.
 

Brownie

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Sep 3, 2018
Messages
1,891
Location
SE Michigan
Real Name
Tim
Here's an example:

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Joined
Nov 21, 2015
Messages
285
Location
The Netherlands
Real Name
Roel
Yes depending on camera brand using an ISO below native ISO can result in problems, mostly regarding highlights. Some Panasonic camera's do weird things to highlight color and Olympus tend to limit dynamic range of the highlights quite substantially (resulting in more blown highlights).

Nothing to problematic, just keep in mind to use native ISO (or higher if needed) for regular balanced shots and shots with (strong) highlights.
On dark shots without real highlights you can use Low ISO setting which can come in handy to reduce noise in shadow area's a bit (at the expense of highlight performance which isn't needed in this case anyway).

@Brownie If there wasn't the top left highlight turned pink I would have had a hard time spotting that the car trunk shouldn't be pink ;)
 

Brownie

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Sep 3, 2018
Messages
1,891
Location
SE Michigan
Real Name
Tim
@Brownie If there wasn't the top left highlight turned pink I would have had a hard time spotting that the car trunk shouldn't be pink ;)
Really? It bugs the crap outta' me. Maybe I'll play with it some. The upper left blown out sky doesn't bother me as much because it's not surrounded by jet black. BTW, that's not a trunk, it's a funny car body:

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
P1046761 by Shotglass Photo, on Flickr
 
Joined
Aug 7, 2013
Messages
480
Location
Florida
Real Name
Todd Cleaver
So I took a look in DxO PL and can't seem to recreate the look you are getting in the OP. I do agree with @relic that the problem has a lot to do with the way your software is handling chromatic NR. I also think it may be applying some micro contrast that works well for the details on the building windows but causes some problems in the shadow detail.

This first picture is with DxO default settings, spot weighted Smart Lighting with the spot set in the problem area, and Prime NR.
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


The second picture builds on the above settings and ads the @Huelight color profile for your camera, and uses selective tone to pull down the highlights a little and bring up the shadows.
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


It might be worth trialing another raw developer and seeing what kind of results you get. I really like DxO PL for ease of use and good results with minimal effort.
 
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
1,527
Location
France
So I took a look in DxO PL and can't seem to recreate the look you are getting in the OP. I do agree with @relic that the problem has a lot to do with the way your software is handling chromatic NR. I also think it may be applying some micro contrast that works well for the details on the building windows but causes some problems in the shadow detail.
It might be worth trialing another raw developer and seeing what kind of results you get. I really like DxO PL for ease of use and good results with minimal effort.
I have both Lightroom & DxO PL3. I use mostly Ligthroom, but PhotoLab is better when recovering underexposed areas (or high ISO) without getting the colors wrong.
The "Prime" noise reduction is pretty aggressive, so I usually use the "zero" setting and get very good results.
 
Joined
Mar 17, 2011
Messages
340
Location
USA, Northeast Coast
Real Name
Richard Correale
In Photoshop, make a selection of the affected area, desaturate it until there's no color variation and also add a gaussian blur to smooth out the noise. Then add some noise back in otherwise the blur will make it look out of place and finally adjust the color/tone with curves to get it where you like it.



Hi all.
Here is a photo I took the other day.
Blue sky and very bright winter sun behind the building.
Taken with my Panny gx80 and 12-32 kit lens.
Settings were:
200 iso- f3.5-12mm. No lens hood.
I exposed for the highlights.

When I opened this photo in photoshop and started to edit it, this is what I saw.
Please look at the under side of the building at all the blue/pink/green splashes/blotches there.
Oh and the histogram said nothing was over or under exposed.
Do you have any idea what causes this ?
Maybe a tip also how to fix it in PP for Photoshop cc ?

I noticed it in a few more photos I took that day.
Not as bad as in this one but still.
My quess when seeing it might be extreem harsh light in combination with shadow areas ?
But I dont have a clue really :)

Any tips/ideas/help is much appreciated :)

Original :
View attachment 797447

Now the photo in Photshop Raw filter and only clicked on auto adjust.


View attachment 797448
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom