Seeing any Posterization issues with A7r ll?

[tashley]

When you guys stop using LE and ACR than I'll listen until than every issue has not shown up in C1 which is a paternership between Sony and Phase. I have said this a dozen times and I can't seem to get it through but you'll listen to a paid reviewer that does not disclose ****. I'm done with this. Talk about respect . How about me 40 freaking years worth

Good bye. Not worth my ****ing time

I've had Lloyd's raw file and I've opened it in C1 and it's a mess. It has nothing to do with respect, I have that for you in spades.

 

[tashley]

And BTWFWIW, Lloyd says he's spoken to the RawDigger boys and that Iliah' s comments were based on his not having processed the file into Adobe RGB the same way as Lloyd did. Lloyd says that he took care to do it correctly and that this is now agreed between Lloyd and Alex, who works with Iliah.

 

[Amin]

Amin, here's a slice from the DPR thread:

Amin: So is what Lloyd is reporting as an issue with the A7RII purely a color management issue?
Iliah: No, it is a mix of three things, exposure, raw format, and colour management; with colour management adding the most to the perceived damage.

Tim, I quoted that very statement 54 posts ago in this very thread. Even colored it cyan for you. But Iliah neither specifically attributed it to the general lossy compression issue everyone has been discussing (different than saying the raw format is contributory), nor did he explain how one could lead to the other. Hence my statement:

"So far, none of the gurus have explained how lossy compression is what caused what you are seeing in the raw digger histo. We know that there are other things that affect raw files."

Tim, pull up a stool and join me in the lion's den....

Are you Daniel or a lion? I don't see anyone attacking you or vice versa.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

I've had Lloyd's raw file and I've opened it in C1 and it's a mess. It has nothing to do with respect, I have that for you in spades.

Lloyds file has no proof it has anything to do with compression. My comment was based on Tim P compression issue that has not showed up in C1

 

[Amin]

And BTWFWIW, Lloyd says he's spoken to the RawDigger boys and that Iliah' s comments were based on his not having processed the file into Adobe RGB the same way as Lloyd did. Lloyd says that he took care to do it correctly and that this is now agreed between Lloyd and Alex, who works with Iliah.

Iliah specifically mentioned in the DPR thread that he had processed the file into Adobe RGB and in doing so gotten the same results Lloyd had showed. Again, this was covered in the quotes I posted way up in this thread.

 

[tashley]

@Amin, the reason I quoted this again was to narrow in on the fact that Iliah believes that at least part of the issue is due to the raw format and then to agree with you that within the various things that could make the raw format to blame, such as pre-cooking, compression, 'other', we don't know which is the most or only significant factor. I certainly didn't intend to post it to imply that you were in any way hiding the truth, far from it!

But I do think that if Iliah hadn't realised that Lloyd's processing into Adobe RGB was done correctly (and this is what I most recently hear) but assume that it was done incorrectly, then it might very well be the case that the burden of fault shifts back towards the RAW format.

Everyone is agreed that we want lossless RAW but few people seem willing to accept that lossy RAW is capable of creating problems. I'm not sure I 'get' that.

- - - Updated - - -

Iliah specifically mentioned in the DPR thread that he had processed the file into Adobe RGB and in doing so gotten the same results Lloyd had showed. Again, this was covered in the quotes I posted way up in this thread.

Then we have a disagreement between Lloyd and Iliah and we need to let them sort it out. But my understanding is that Lloyd had processed it differently to how Iliah assumed he had processed it, with Lloyd cognisant of the gamut issues, and still got posterisation.

 

[k-hawinkler]

Frankly Sony should put this situation behind them by supporting 14 bit lossless compression in their cameras ASAP!

 

[Amin]

Tim, my interest in all of this is mostly just intellectual curiosity. I'm far too casual a photographer to care for any practical purposes.

I'm convinced that lossy raw can cause some issues with A7RII files. I've seen a bunch of examples of this. I'm not sure if what Lloyd is pointing out with orange peel or posterization represents an issue with the Sony lossy compression, the raw support, the camera settings affecting raw, or something else. I'm interested to dig and learn more.

Again, I couldn't care less for the purposes of my own photography. I didn't care about my Fuji X10 orbs, my Nikon D600 oil spots, or my M240 banding. None of this stuff bothers me. I do have a longstanding bias towards keeping raw as raw as possible, but that's just an ideal for me.

\But my understanding is that Lloyd had processed it differently to how Iliah assumed he had processed it, with Lloyd cognisant of the gamut issues, and still got posterisation.

It's very clear from the DPR thread that Iliah reproduced Lloyd's findings and found that the bulk of the posterization "damage" happened when going from Pro Photo RGB to Adobe RGB. This doesn't mean that Lloyd processed it wrong or was not cognizant of gamut issues (though he omitted discussion of their contribution until his second blog post).

There's only one way to convert to Adobe RGB in Lightroom. The methods Iliah mentions which could have prevented the bulk of the "damage" involve specific manipulations during Photoshop soft proofing, manipulations that few of us would do. So it is simultaneously predominantly a color gamut issue as well as a real issue contributed to by raw format, according to Iliah.

 

[Vivek]

Then we have a disagreement between Lloyd and Iliah and we need to let them sort it out. But my understanding is that Lloyd had processed it differently to how Iliah assumed he had processed it, with Lloyd cognisant of the gamut issues, and still got posterisation.

I agree. These vicarious reviews are so

You did not see any posterization. Well and good.

 

[Iliah Borg]

Lloyds file has no proof it has anything to do with compression. My comment was based on Tim P compression issue that has not showed up in C1

For this shot, the problem is not the compression, but missing bits in deep shadows of the red channel, that is decompression resulting in 13-bit data, and with some additional gaps (totally missing data numbers where they need to be present).

 

[Amin]

Thanks, Iliah. What is causing those additional gaps, any idea? Could any of the corrections settings in camera be part of the issue?

 

[mjm6]

Funny, at the very beginning of this thread, I went over and saw the photo and thought "he has a problem with gamut happening here..."

I have seen this from intense blue lake water before, and it is a real problem that is somewhat unique to this type of condition (blue skies don't do it, thankfully).

I was going to post something about the gamut issue, but he claimed in his post that he didn't have a problem with gamut, and I figured he knew what he was talking about, but I guess not so much in this example.

In fact, this is really not an unknown problem... I recall seeing a photoshop book for photographers from the early 2000's that discussed this very issue in it, using an example from the waters of Crater Lake here in the US, which is known for its saturated blueish/glacial looking waters.



---Michael

 

[timparkin]

When you guys stop using LR and ACR than I'll listen until than every issue has not shown up in C1 which is a paternership between Sony and Phase. I have said this a dozen times and I can't seem to get it through but you'll listen to a paid reviewer that does not disclose ****. I'm done with this. Talk about respect . How about me 40 freaking years worth

Good bye. Not worth my ****ing time

Happens with C1 too... do you need a screenshot?

 

[ShooterSteve]

Guy,

I think most people in our industry probably use Lightroom or Photoshop to process their files. This is especially true at ad agencies, design firms and corporate in-house art departments. Sony can't expect everyone to switch to C1. That is not a realistic solution.

 

[ShooterSteve]

For this shot, the problem is not the compression, but missing bits in deep shadows of the red channel, that is decompression resulting in 13-bit data, and with some additional gaps (totally missing data numbers where they need to be present).

Can you explain the solution to this problem?

 

[Iliah Borg]

Thanks, Iliah. What is causing those additional gaps, any idea? Could any of the corrections settings in camera be part of the issue?

It looks like camera "sensitivity" calibration, as the gaps are at the same data numbers in all channels. May be vignetting compensation, for example, or some other compensation.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Happens with C1 too... do you need a screenshot?

No totally fine Tim. My point is yes we will see some compression issues come down. The pike. It's pretty rare was my main point. I'm all for 14 bit lossy Rae's but we seem to be blaming everything on this and that's not the case. Frankly I want all the options and the ability to chose or even turn off. I still believe there is a major issue with Adobe right now with this new body. I would not be putting a lot of faith in it right now. Orange peel for instance is not in C1. So red flags get raised.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Freaking typos . No time to fix at hospital. Waiting on test results

Pardon the typos

 

[timparkin]

Happens with C1 too... do you need a screenshot?

https://www.anony.ws/i/2015/08/21/c1.jpg

 

[tashley]

Freaking typos . No time to fix at hospital. Waiting on test results

Pardon the typos

Good luck with them!