DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Current Challenge >> Grain Comments
Pages:  
Showing posts 26 - 38 of 38, (reverse)
AuthorThread
10/25/2005 03:33:21 PM · #26
I was looking for the noise to add to the atmospehre of the picture, enough to tell it was there but not so much that the image was distorted. Some were just nice or interesting pictues with noise added, and that did not meet the challenge IMO.
I also think that while ISO adds grain/noise, it is less noticeable in the relative small size that we view pictures at.
10/25/2005 04:09:37 PM · #27
Originally posted by Flash:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

... One picture would be excellent, but have only a smidge of noise, the next would have lots of noise, but wouldn't be too good. To make matters worse, the amount of noise "required" seemed to be a moving target. I think I managed to sort things out in the end, but I'll say again, it was tough.


This sums up nicely a key factor that some voters are missing. The challenge was to use grain (aka noise) to help communicate the message of your photograph. No where does it say that the entire image must be grainy, (although it could be) nor does it say that a required amount of grain is the minimum or maximum. It is left to the voters to decide that line.

Although I understand the comments left on my entry and I appreciate them very much, I apparently did a poor job of effectively using "grain", as the consistent comment is "where is the grain?".

For months I have read thread after thread on the virtues of one camera versus another based on the fact that it has an ISO capability of 100 instead of 200. The reasons given for the benefit of the ISO 100 was the improvement of less grain. Therefore it comes as a surprise to me to have shot a frame at ISO 1600, usm'd .3px at 304% and yet the prevailing thought is no grain. I can only conclude that those voting either miss the grain present in the elements of the photograph that communicate the message, or the banter between camera users on the virtue of ISO 100's superiority over a body with a minimum of ISO 200, was misguided.

Regardless, I always learn from comments made and it truly helps to have an unbiased and honest opinion from another photographer. I hope that those that receive comments glean the learning intended and those that leave them, continue to do so.


The amount of grain visible will be dependant on the resolution at which the image is viewed. The higher the resolution, the smoother the image will look. The lower the resolution, well, you get the picture. Not to influence how people are looking at images, if it is not obvious, try lowering the resolution at which the image is viewed.
10/25/2005 04:19:33 PM · #28
I have had two comments, both good, constructive comments. One liked the photo but was doubtful about the background, the other saw what I was trying to express with my photo. I think the grain in my shot only shows in the subject, which was the intention. Thanx to the two commentors.

I voted right thru and was concerned by the number of photos that were of a normal subject with added noise, seemingly for no apparent reason other than the need for noise/grain. The noise/grain had no bearing whatsoever to the content of the shot. On the other hand, there were some excellent shots and I have scored them accordingly.

As usual, it is what the voter sees that determines the winner, good luck to those who triumph.

Steve
10/25/2005 07:10:18 PM · #29
wavelength-

I just gave out about 20 more grain comments. Did I get to yours yet?
Did I use the word Love again? LOL
10/25/2005 07:13:33 PM · #30
If anyone wants comments on any photo in a challenge this is in my profile:

If you are reading this and wish you had more comments on your current entry. Feel free to pm me the image ID or the title and I will give you an honest critique.
10/25/2005 07:15:15 PM · #31
I didn't post a shot for this challenge, but I have managed to go through and vote on all the entries. I am trying to get through leaving some comments, but I never manage to get very far, just too busy most of the time. I do appreciate the comments that are left for me when I enter a challenge, so I try to reciprocate and leave as many as I can for other entrants. Wish I had more time to do so. I also find that I am not very eloquent when leaving comments and sound like I have no idea what I am talking about. Most of them just come out very bland and boring...love this shot, great colors..etc. Need to work on that some more! LOL.
10/25/2005 07:25:53 PM · #32
Just curious, has anyone actually gone through the entire voting week without recieving a single comment?
10/29/2005 11:31:52 AM · #33
Ok, so I commented on a few entries, around 30 now and would try to add more comments today, ladyhawk, I hope to come across yours :)
10/31/2005 12:24:17 AM · #34
Ladyhawk22 left the following comment on my photo:

"Good lighting and nice B&W. Grain really makes this seem like a turn of the century photo (except for the clarity of the shot, which is nice!)"

Here's the photo:



This comment made me think about something. Photos that were made during the civil war era and up into the early 1900s were actually VERY clear images and they probably contained NO grain at all. What made me think about this is a recent restoration and duplication I did for one of my customers. Here's their photo that was made in 1897:



These photographs were made with glass plates that had some sort of albumin emulsion on them with silver oxide in that emulsion. Bear may be able to explain this process in some detail since I'm fairly ignorant of it. The print made from these plates is basically a contact print and the print is the same size as the plate.

I don't believe that 'grain' was introduced into photography until roll film came to life. Whether or not my challenge photo looks good with grain is subjective. I personally prefer my FINAL EDIT which has no grain. As far as being historically correct, it is NOT. So, I learned something this week after thinking about the comment I received...

Thanks :)

John Setzler
10/31/2005 12:53:24 AM · #35
You are correct. Grain appeared as a direct result of pushing ASA speed and processing. It lifts its face barely with ASA 200 and gloats with the 400 and above speeds. The more you double the more grain you see. The same thing happens in digital only we know it as noise. A few cameras suffer even at 100 but this is mainly a software problem.
10/31/2005 09:04:27 PM · #36
Originally posted by graphicfunk:

You are correct. Grain appeared as a direct result of pushing ASA speed and processing. It lifts its face barely with ASA 200 and gloats with the 400 and above speeds. The more you double the more grain you see. The same thing happens in digital only we know it as noise. A few cameras suffer even at 100 but this is mainly a software problem.


I bet the example photo I posted was probably at an equivalent of ISO 4 or so... yes FOUR.... I need to try to find out...
10/31/2005 09:49:24 PM · #37
Check out Scully & Osterman Studio and Quinn Jacobsen, these artists use the wetplate collodion method used in earlier photography...their work is amazing, it's nice to see some people are keeping these old practices alive.
10/31/2005 09:57:42 PM · #38
Originally posted by jmsetzler:

These photographs were made with glass plates that had some sort of albumin emulsion on them with silver oxide in that emulsion. Bear may be able to explain this process in some detail since I'm fairly ignorant of it.


Tell us Bear, what was it like taking pictures in the civil war? Were you scared?

Message edited by author 2005-10-31 21:57:55.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 08/31/2025 03:47:27 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/31/2025 03:47:27 PM EDT.