The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Sony a7r jaggies

daf

Member
Hi,
i have a lot of "jaggies" when i process picture from my a7r with capture one 7/8... A lot more than when using the sony rawconverter.
Even with all preset turn off (NR/accentuation), i still have some "jaggies" strange definition.
Do you guys have experiment this also?
Did you find a way to work around?
Is LR better than C1 for this?
 

daf

Member
I also feel that it depends on the lens used, feel like this is much more present with wide and vey wide, but this need to be confirmed.
 

ErikKaffehr

Well-known member
Hi,

The jaggies you see is a starcase effect, a classic aliasing artefact. It really depends on the lens "outresolving the lens".

Not very probable that another raw converter would give superior results, but if you post a raw file I and quite a few others would be interested in looking at it.

Stopping down to f/11 or so would soften the image so much that the jaggies you see would go away, I guess.

Best regards
Erik




I also feel that it depends on the lens used, feel like this is much more present with wide and vey wide, but this need to be confirmed.
 

Annna T

Active member
Hi,

The jaggies you see is a starcase effect, a classic aliasing artefact. It really depends on the lens "outresolving the lens".

Not very probable that another raw converter would give superior results, but if you post a raw file I and quite a few others would be interested in looking at it.

Stopping down to f/11 or so would soften the image so much that the jaggies you see would go away, I guess.

Best regards
Erik
Or may be also partially due to the fact that Sony raws are not lossless in their compression. Here is what DPreview states about this in their review :

Sony compresses its Raw files in a lossy and non-optional manner, which raises some concerns about a camera so likely to be bought by demanding Raw shooters. We wish Sony allowed users to save an uncompressed and un-suppressed Raw file, but we didn't encounter the theoretical limitations imposed by Sony's methods to the extent that we found it to be a problem
 

scho

Well-known member
Or take a look at Cho's pictures in the "sony techcam example" thread to see what i mean by jaggies, to me his pictures are clearly oversharpened, but i'm sure even with all sharpening settings turn off, there would be some jaggies in the trees :
https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5610/14956708513_c0d1484c2b_o.jpg
My screen name is Scho. There are definitely problems with that image, but they have nothing to do with "oversharpening" artifacts or "jaggies". As I mentioned in the post you quoted there were problems associated with excessive wind that blurred the trees and also they were out of focus due to lens blur at the top of the image. Global contrast adjustment just made the trees look worse.
 

Chuck Jones

Subscriber Member
Hi,
i have a lot of "jaggies" when i process picture from my a7r with capture one 7/8... A lot more than when using the sony rawconverter.
Even with all preset turn off (NR/accentuation), i still have some "jaggies" strange definition.
Do you guys have experiment this also?
Did you find a way to work around?
Is LR better than C1 for this?
Hi DAF,
Wow, very difficult to diagnose your problem without more information. What lenses are you using specifically that are causing problems? What ISO are you shooting at? What shutter speed? The A7R does have reported and documented problems with some ultra-wide lenses, so beware of that. The image detail you show is great for illustrating, but seeing the whole image WITH the EXIF information intact would be helpful for research. Or better yet, put a RAW file up on your Dropbox.

That said, DXO and Irridient Digital make other RAW converter options that work well also with the Sony files. You may wish to try a demo version of those to see if it makes a difference in your particular case. I find RAW processors to be much like different developers were back in my darkroom days, each has its strengths and each its weaknesses.

Warmest Regards,
Chuck Jones
 

Michiel Schierbeek

Well-known member
I see no jaggies. Usually you would see them in the diagonal lines and I don't see them.
Leaves are always moving, depends on the wind and shutterspeed as well.
 

philber

Member
OK, in fairness to Daf, I can see jaggies as well. Specifically, if you use the magnified version of Scho's picture, and view the centre top crop, I can see a few "jagged" branches that are definitely not due to some form of blur. It looks typically like the sort of artefact you get when using more than 100% magnification. And, judging by the size of Scho's magnified picture, I just wonder whether that's not the case, or whether it is not a by-product of the site on which he stores his pics, such as Flick'r, where it could be a compression artefact.
That said, with now thousands of A7R pictures under my belt, each of which viewed at 100% on Capture 1, with as many as 10 lenses of different provenance, I have never run into this problem. Not once. So I can't post pics of an absence of problems, can I?
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
I get jaggies a lot, when the files are viewed on a circa 100 dpi monitor and not at all when when viewed on a circa 200 dpi monitor. Both at 100%. They don't appear in print, they are not IMHO a result of the lens out resolving the sensor and they don't show up in print. I mentally put them down to compression of RAW and even if that's wrong, they are irritating only when editing and not when printed...
 

ErikKaffehr

Well-known member
Hi,

Here is a real world artifact of the Delta compression on the Sony (from the Diglloyd website:


And here is some writing by Jim Kasson, who investigated the issue in some depth: 17 | February | 2014 | The Last Word

As you can see it shows up as vertical lines, 16 pixels long.

Best regards
Erik



Or may be also partially due to the fact that Sony raws are not lossless in their compression. Here is what DPreview states about this in their review :

Sony compresses its Raw files in a lossy and non-optional manner, which raises some concerns about a camera so likely to be bought by demanding Raw shooters. We wish Sony allowed users to save an uncompressed and un-suppressed Raw file, but we didn't encounter the theoretical limitations imposed by Sony's methods to the extent that we found it to be a problem
 

turtle

New member
What do you have to do to provoke this is the question. I've not seen problems myself, despite heavily working files in post, but that is not to say I don;t believe it exists. However, I cannot help but feel that Mr Chambers spends far more time finding problems than is relevant to real world use. You can find problems with everything, everywhere, every time if you are so determined. My issue with Lloyd C is that he is detached from what really matters to real photographers because he isn't one. Or do I have this one wrong? If so, why are the examples of problems on his site and not being thrown around by photographers encountering these problems in the wild?

Hi,

Here is a real world artifact of the Delta compression on the Sony (from the Diglloyd website:


And here is some writing by Jim Kasson, who investigated the issue in some depth: 17 | February | 2014 | The Last Word

As you can see it shows up as vertical lines, 16 pixels long.

Best regards
Erik
 

ErikKaffehr

Well-known member
Hi,

No provocation on my part. The sample I show is a rare artefact of that compression. That is what it looks like.

What I feel that there is a lot of noise about Sony's raw compression, so I felt it would be nice to point out what it looks like. If you don't see an effect like this, than it is not raw compression artefact.

Personally, I am absolutely sure that the jaggies discussed are an aliasing artefact.

Best regards
Erik



What do you have to do to provoke this is the question. I've not seen problems myself, despite heavily working files in post, but that is not to say I don;t believe it exists. However, I cannot help but feel that Mr Chambers spends far more time finding problems than is relevant to real world use. You can find problems with everything, everywhere, every time if you are so determined. My issue with Lloyd C is that he is detached from what really matters to real photographers because he isn't one. Or do I have this one wrong? If so, why are the examples of problems on his site and not being thrown around by photographers encountering these problems in the wild?
 
Top