Cowboy Country

[Rob MacKillop]

DP1M.AuldNikSilver

 

[Julian de'Courcy]

Another beauty, on a roll Rob.

 

[Rob MacKillop]

Thanks, Julian. Same walk as Dirt Track. This one is obviously cropped.

 

[Rob MacKillop]

So, how do I get rid of the artefacts, the "shadow" line above the trees?

 

[Rob MacKillop]

OK, I've figured out how to do using layer masks, choosing the closest colour, the brushing it away. I'd do it now, but I have a few students to deal with...

 

[Julian de'Courcy]

For one I did not notice anything wrong and still cannot, to small an image for me to see such things. Is it banding? Also I never think it is that important unless really bad.

 

[Rob MacKillop]

There is banding, top right of the sky. But can you see a darker outline immediately above the trees? Once I get a moment I'' "repair" it and upload that version for comparison.

 

[Rob MacKillop]

Mr Askew would have commented on it straight away. He does, you know

 

[Rob MacKillop]

And quite rightly so, I must add.

 

[Rob MacKillop]

Here is the version where I've removed the digital artefact which was causing a halo or darker shadow line above the trees:



Looking at it here, I can see faint traces of what I was trying to get rid of, but there is a definite improvement. Can you see the difference? This is a slightly different version of the same image - I didn't realise that when making the repair, but what I did is still relevant.

Now, how do I get rid of the banding, top right in the sky?

 

[Julian de'Courcy]

Looks fine to me Rob, those pixel peepers are never up to anything good
The Merrill's have a reputation of banding in the sky, which is why they put the banding slider in SSP. I see it as a kind of Polaroid look . Maybe try the banding slider in the raw, or, and the lasso tool and noise reduction.

 

[Rob MacKillop]

Where the heck is the banding slider in SPP? I can't see it.

Mind you, there is no banding in the raw version. I think in this case it comes from Auld Nik...

 

[Pete Askew]

Lovely shot again, Rob and those super, soft clouds again. I have had problems with banding from lots of different cameras and Nik SilverFX. So far I've not managed to prevent it in certain images. I need to look at the problem more systematically I think.

 

[Rob MacKillop]

Someone somewhere online said that Nik Dfine cures it, but I can't see how.

 

[Pete Askew]

The current version is supposed to reduce banding but that is the one I have installed (auto updated). What I have spotted is that although the files are 16 bit, and despite ProPhoto RGB being the preferred colour space for Lightroom it was using sRGB for external editing except for PS. I've changed that now and will see if that resolved the problem I had the other day.

 

[Pete Askew]

No, that has absolutely no impact on the banding! And neither does Define for that matter. Takes the film grain out nicely though!

 

[Rob MacKillop]

That's my conclusion also...

 

[Julian de'Courcy]

Where the heck is the banding slider in SPP? I can't see it.

Mind you, there is no banding in the raw version. I think in this case it comes from Auld Nik...

Sorry Rob not slider. It is called something else. Right by the noise reduction and Chroma. White dots that can be placed within a black space Confused
The canon sensors can band easy and as Pete says many sensors, especially when underexposed . I know my canon though bands run vertical and horizontal. The sky banding I experience from the Dp's runs horizontally only. But then bmy sight is not great for these things.
A lot of the guys who have used Sigma camera's since the beginning, say the Merrils need to be shot all things being equal at +7 exposure. I have been trying this the last few days and have at least found the Merrils deal with recovering higlights better than bringing back shadows, so there seems some validity to this claim.

 

[Rob MacKillop]

+7???

Next time I fire it up, I'll look for white dots. Can't imagine what they are.

 

[Julian de'Courcy]

+7???

Next time I fire it up, I'll look for white dots. Can't imagine what they are.

what the many refer to as +7 ?as I almost alway compensate for exposure, this does not work except I think they are saying use the base exposure as +7 as if it was 0/0 . All I know I prefer images over exposed if they can be pulled back, rather than other way around.