Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 44
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Bellevue, WA
    Posts
    1,206

    Question Replacement purple fringing tunnel of doom photo

    Seeing how I can no longer take the purple fringing tunnel of doom photo at Stanford, I've been looking for replacements.

    What do you guys think of this? It's taken in the Presidio in San Francisco and is on public property (it better be-- it's a National Park).



    Thanks,
    Jeff
    Jeff Keller
    Founder/Editor, Digital Camera Resource Page

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1
    I think it has potential for sure. as for my own personal preferences, i find the sides a little distracting. i think if you cropped down to just the corridor, it would give great perspective and a place to drawn the viewer in. a place for their eyes to travel. if that makes sense.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Tallinn, Estonia
    Posts
    225
    It looks like a substitute which does not keep up to the original, sorry
    I can see 2 weak points in the Presidio picture if compared to the Stanford tunnel.

    - All of the surfaces are even and plain, without fine details which were present at Stanford. You wouldn't probably notice the heavy default noice reduction as you could easily spot here

    - It is much lighter in the tunnel at Presidio so it is kind of "easier stress test" for the reviewed cameras.

    The Stanford tunnel was really-really a good test site. It offered a site with extreme lighting conditions (sunshine, clear sky, shadows, very dark areas and artificial lighting all in one picture!), textured walls in the sunshine, in the areas with extremely low light and with any other lihgting levels in between. What is on the same level as was before, is the sharp edges which allow to test the possible purple fringing problem of the lenses.

    I wouldn't say that the new test site is not suitable at all. If there aren't any better ones available then you have to take what you've got
    Last edited by Margus; 03-02-2011 at 12:07 PM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    5
    Hi Jeff,
    In my opinion, to test purple fringing and highlight clipping the photo should be fine (even though the sky in the image looks overcast; I think I am somehow used to the tunnel being photographed on sunny days; does this affect the highlight clipping testing?)

    Roman

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    667
    The purple fringing is pretty obvious in the Presidio photo so I'd say it's best to use this location for the next little bit to see how it fares over several reviews. Don't waste too much time looking for a new site.
    Nikon D40|Nikon D5100|AF-S 50mm f/1.4|AF-S 18-105mm DX|SB 900|SB 400|AF-S 35mm f/1.8 DX|AF-S 10-24mm DX

    Canon A610

    Flickr

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    4
    Our 'tunnel of doom' in southern Alameda county.
    (pocket camera, HDR mode, lots of NR).
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Livin in a redneck paradise
    Posts
    1,874
    I dunno, the purple fringing tunnel of doom was probably the most useful of all your test locations, and the one most difficult to replace. If I ever see references to your test photos on other web sites, they are generally to that one. Apart from purple fringing, it is also a great place to examine low ISO dynamic range and shadow noise. This new one is too bright and cheery in my opinion, and it does not have the useful textures of the original.


    Will they let you continue at just the one location? All the other test shots can be taken anywhere.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Fremont, CA
    Posts
    37

    why not hsoot a tree?

    I think if you shoot something llike a tree, you will be able to get he same results (purple fringing + texture)



    (sorry bout the title)

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    7
    As another poster pointed out, the lack of texture to the surfaces makes it an "easier" photo. Also, the lack of contrast when compared with the Stanford photo makes it less of a test. The Stanford photo included everything from brightly lit sections to very dark, yet still detailed in texture, sections (Look at the very dark ceiling in the Stanford photo). That's going to be very telling about a camera's ability to capture detail in both light and dark portions of images.

    I think that you are trying too hard to make it similar in perspective and appearance to the previous Stanford photo. I would just evaluate what the previous photo demonstrated and look for a replacement that tests a camera in the same ways.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Fremont, CA
    Posts
    37
    the cool apperence/ lack of contrast might be the lightings fault, not the place

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •