PDA

View Full Version : C770 Image Quality?



Gene H
01-08-2005, 07:25 AM
Hi all, lots af good info here. I just replaced my C700 with a C770. One of the reasons I upgraded was to reduce video noise in my indoor portrait shots(family gatherings, etc..). I'm suprised to see, even though much less than the C700, there is still much more noise and lower quality with the C770 than with my wifes Canon A80. I'm take the pictures with identical settings(lighting, distance), in both auto and P with and without saturation and contrast bumped up. I'm including an example. Is this normal or do I have a lemon.
TIA.

Gene

tonay
01-09-2005, 07:17 AM
Hi

I have a 765 and have noticed the same type of thing - especially with highly textured fabrics. It has been suggested to me to turn down the sharpness which helped and - i'm not sure why, but this appears more proment when viewing photos on the computer because photos printed at "the do it your self photo machine" look amazing and much better than the same thing on monitor.

If anyone else has input on this I'd love to hear as well.

D70FAN
01-09-2005, 07:36 AM
Hi all, lots af good info here. I just replaced my C700 with a C770. One of the reasons I upgraded was to reduce video noise in my indoor portrait shots(family gatherings, etc..). I'm suprised to see, even though much less than the C700, there is still much more noise and lower quality with the C770 than with my wifes Canon A80. I'm take the pictures with identical settings(lighting, distance), in both auto and P with and without saturation and contrast bumped up. I'm including an example. Is this normal or do I have a lemon.
TIA.

Gene

Since we can't view the EXIF info it's hard to be absolute, but it looks like the Olympus is set for low resolution (like 1024 x 768 or lower) or the ISO is set to 400 or more, or both. Even in auto mode you need to go through and check available settings. In progam mode this is a definate necessity.

My old 1.3MP CP900 takes better shots than that, so something is definately amiss.

tonay
01-10-2005, 03:27 AM
I'm pretty new to all this - what exactly is the "ISO" and what setting do you recommend?

Thanks for your insight

Geoff Chandler
01-10-2005, 10:35 AM
ISO - or ASA is the sensitivity to a given amount of light - with film you have to buy according to your needs - but with digital it can be altered from picture to picture. Lower ISO 50, 100 - will give less noise but requires more light for your correct exposure, higher ISO ~200, 400 & above require less light but give a more grainy 'noisier' appearance.
Aditionally to all this - Olympus tend to bump up their contrast and sharpness - so this might magnify the noise sometimes. Try -3 Contrast and - 1, or -2 on the sharpness stick with lower ASA/ISO where possible.
Now, hopefully, that's ISO makes sense here's a suggestion. I have the C-740 and it has a custom button ~ you can allocate what you want it to do (your is the same) so I decided to have that to change the ISO which is handy. Sometimes I am about to take a pic and the light is just too low for comfort and I have the apperture wide open and the shutter speed is still too slow... I press that button and it is quickly changed ~ just a suggestion.

Hope some of that helps

Geoff

tonay
01-12-2005, 03:50 AM
Thanks Geoff.

What would you recommend for say:
-indoor w/ a flash
-indoor w/ redeye
-sunny south florida outdoor

Or, is there a basic setting rescource or website you could recoomend - a digital photography for dummies kind of thing?

Thanks so much for your experise

Geoff Chandler
01-19-2005, 06:31 PM
Not quite sure what your abbreviations were (my dyslexic brain!).
But indoors with a flash - there are several settings. Included are the usual Red eye setting which causes the camera to give at a rapid burst of flashes before taking the pic - thereby causeing the subjects Irises in the eyes to close down stopping the extra light coming in and lighting up the retina which reflects back as red eye.
I quite like experimenting with the different settings - there is a first curtain and second curtain as well - this means that 1st curtain = flash for the first part of the exposure then the rest taken w/o flash. 2nd curtain means it takes some of the picture then gives off a flash ~ great for an action shot - idid this with the kids and took them jumping off a concrete platform into a river in the evening - I got a blur leading into 2 frozen images of the kids - that looked like a movement and then them frozen at the end. Sorry I'm probably going on too much. I actually like natural light photos without flash.
If all else fails - indoor flash works well in Auto for a snapshot.
But As for Digital Phots for Dummies - I would suggest going to a bookshop (really!) remeber those places we used to go before the internet? Oh heck - browse somewhere like Amazon for a book then ~ anyway, I am sure there are LOADs of books instructing how to use digital cameras and what techniques you can use - the beauty being you can browse and pick up a book anytime.
Now those settings I suggested were merely suggestions - I find the sharpness and contrast a bit high on the Oly UZ's I have come accross. Since tweaking mine I notice things like skin tones are smoother and finer shading is better.
Sunny Florida Outdoor - well I live in wet South East England - so I am jealous already!! But you will need to keep your ASA/ISO settings lower and no doubt you will be running at higher shutter speeds and/or smaller appertures. Hopefully this all makes sense - if not ask, there are a multitude of people who are writing in this Forum with far more knowledge than me. But I will always try to help.
Sorry I went on! - hope some of this was helpfull.
Geoff

tonay
01-20-2005, 06:00 AM
Very Very helpful, you can run on anytime.

Thanks again

speaklightly
01-20-2005, 07:00 PM
Hey, you really should attempt to reduce the electronic noise in this digital photo first, before all of you start conjecturing.

I really think it is a problem with so called "electronic noise". Use Noise Ninja Software and then go a bit further with the investigation. You will be quite surprised with the reults.

Sarah Joyce

Thon
01-21-2005, 05:35 PM
I've been trying out the Noise Ninja to try reduce the noise levels in my photos, just to see the difference before and after.

I tried it on photos from my Stulus 400 and C770UZ and the photos become smoother but there also seem to be some loss in fine details when viewed on screen. Is this normal, or maybe I should be using a different setting (I set it on default)?

I've not done any proper comparison for prints yet, but so far the untouched photos looks great.

speaklightly
01-23-2005, 05:10 AM
Thon-

I agree with you. Noise Ninja's trump card is smoothness. So there is a bit of a compromise, to get that smoothness, you do give up a bit of detail.

Sarah Joyce

Geoff Chandler
01-29-2005, 05:29 AM
I guess ultimately - any Post Processing is a sort of a compromise. You always loose something albeit virtually invisible on many occasions. More often the pluses outweigh the minuses - I haven't got 'Noise Ninja' but it sounds like a handy bit of software. I have, on occasions, softened pictures to remove noise - if you have control over how much you do along with a preview - then it's great - I always resave with a rename usually 'Name ####a' so I can compare afterwards. Try playing with some of these photos as Sarah suggested - make sure you keep a copy of the original. I agree with you that you would prefer to not have the problem in the first place - go back to the settings on the camera ~ contrast & sharpness. Not quite sure how the 'electrical noise' affects one pic and not the other. Just while I'm writing - one thing I have done - actually with some of my old photo scans - is to slightly soften a pic - therby reducing some of the grainy noise - then I apply a little bit of unsharp mask (sounds crazy I know) so I can sometimes manage to smoothen and sharpen - it works providing the changes are gentle. In my mind initially It sounds like it shouldn't work - soften then sharpen. But it does.
Hope you eventually sort it all out - the Oly is a good camera - so is the Canon - and at the end of the day they won't look identical as they are quite different cameras.
Geoff