Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2015/05/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I get banding when I have a very bright light source in the picture. Like the street lights around the Flatiron Building. This show of yours, Tina with that very bright bare bulb par light in the pix is a prime candidate for banding. Also I get a lot less banding now that I have a pretty fast card. Before I had pretty slow cards. But I also have more modern lenses so it could be that. Its lights in the picture and they can be just out of the picture and you still get it. Maybe even worse. Off axis I think they call that. On 5/11/15 7:52 PM, "George Lottermoser" <george.imagist at icloud.com> wrote: > > On May 10, 2015, at 8:26 PM, Tina Manley wrote: > >> This particular photo was very dark. The ISO is only 320 but there is >> severe banding in the shadows. Why? It's there in the original dng >> without any manipulation. If the ISO is 320, just like most of the other >> B&W's in low light, why is there so much banding in this one? >> >> http://www.pbase.com/tinamanley/image/160019998 >> >> Does anybody know how to get rid of banding? > > I think it fair to assume that if you attempt to open shadows > which are severely underexposed > you'll eventually see "banding" or other digital artifacts. > > The solution is simply not attempting to "open" shadows this severely > underexposed. > (in my experience) > > You can always look for and find "the limits" on either extreme end; > both highlight overexposure and shadow underexposure > > Regards, > George Lottermoser > > http://www.imagist.com > http://www.imagist.com/blog > http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information -- Mark William Rabiner Photographer http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/