Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/12/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]OK, I played with it a little more, I forgot which part I did with the Epson PhotoRAW and which part I did with the Photoshop, but this time is almost only Epson PhotoRAW changes: http://www.dragonsgate.net/pub/richard/EPSN0298_BW2.jpg Certainly the noise is much better. The shadow is darker but I guess truer to the actual scene... At 09:06 PM 12/12/2004, you wrote: >Richard, > >It seems a bit noisier than my Fuji Neopan 1600 images, and certainly >noisier than the images I now shoot with the Canon 20D at ISO 1600. But >there are so many variables involved--for example, how much did you have >to bring up the shadow, and did you do it in Photoshop or during the RAW >conversion? I find that any significant corrections in Photoshop at these >speeds (as opposed to during RAW conversion) result in too much noise, >both with scanned film and digital capture. > >Nathan > >Richard wrote: > >>http://www.dragonsgate.net/pub/richard/EPSN0298_BW.jpg >>ASA1600, converted using Epson PhotoRAW >>It has quite a bit of digital noise, from both using ASA1600, USM, and >>bringing up the shadow to see the faces in the background. For people >>that are used to shoot B&W, does the noise look worse than B&W film shot >>at ASA1600? // richard (This email is for mailing lists. To reach me directly, please use richard at imagecraft.com)