- Messages
- 5,434
- Name
- Terry
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Or not worry about it. I’d be happy with most of your Flickr macros
and help to keep the site free for all
Whats this all about ?
- Thread starter Graham
- Start date
- Messages
- 2,247
- Name
- Brian
- Edit My Images
- Yes
If you are seeing something that nobody else can then it's time to examine your viewing equipment.
The fact that this phenomenon, whatever it may be, has only recently started may be a clue.
Do you have another video monitor that you can try?
Last edited:
OP
- Messages
- 7,337
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Thanks, My O/H can see it.
- Messages
- 2,247
- Name
- Brian
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I meant nobody else on the forum.
If it's only visible locally then that's grounds for further suspicion.
OP
- Messages
- 7,337
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Sorry Brian, Maybe it was me that was confused by what you meant.
Have you looked at my flickr page, latest shot there, it`s near the top middle.
- Messages
- 1,369
- Name
- Chris
- Edit My Images
- Yes
It's certainly much bigger. If I zoom in as much as I can I still see nothing that I don't see if I zoom in a lot to any of the very out of focus blurred bits in my own photos, nothing out of the ordinary, annoying, or some kind of problem that should be rectified. But you obviously see something badly wrong. Can you describe in words what that wrongness is, or maybe even better, show us an image which doesn't have this problem, which is what you want these problem areas to look like?
Sorry - been away from my computer.
I ask whether you’ve got another lens as the artifacts seem consistent - and unappealing - however they appear to me to be lens characteristics - hence suggesting another lens to compare this to and see whether it’s a camera or lens issue.
To me - it falls under the category or displeasing and unattractive bokeh.
I ask whether you’ve got another lens as the artifacts seem consistent - and unappealing - however they appear to me to be lens characteristics - hence suggesting another lens to compare this to and see whether it’s a camera or lens issue.
To me - it falls under the category or displeasing and unattractive bokeh.
- Messages
- 5,434
- Name
- Terry
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Try focus stacking at a wider aperture for more pleasing bokeh. That will probably confirm it
OP
- Messages
- 7,337
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I don't do stacking [emoji24]
- Messages
- 4,519
- Name
- droj
- Edit My Images
- No
Ah - Flickr. Ok, I see nothing unpleasant there on any of your shots with a similar background. All I see is very acceptable bokeh. The bokeh performance of lenses is something that I tend to be quite critical / selective of, and I see nothing untoward.
I think that you're going to have to summon the vocabulary to tell us more exactly what you're on about, otherwise we're lost about what to respond to.
I think that you're going to have to summon the vocabulary to tell us more exactly what you're on about, otherwise we're lost about what to respond to.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 8,758
- Name
- John
- Edit My Images
- No
Post a macro photo shot with this lens that doesn't contain this pixeling your talking about.
Maybe then we can figure out exactly what your complaint is...
- Messages
- 15,387
- Name
- Jeff
- Edit My Images
- No
You can’t compare that with mine either ,mine on micro four thirds at compared to your 800mm so the whole aspect is different ,but basically the background in mine is just de.focussed leaves ,flowers etc .
As the others have said your looking for a non existing problem.
And tbh your lens wasn’t very good when brand new I doubt it’s improved over the years . Invest in a up to date macro lens to see a improvement . Btw have you checked your lens for internal dust bunnies or even the dreaded fungus ,it’s at that sort of age
As the others have said your looking for a non existing problem.
And tbh your lens wasn’t very good when brand new I doubt it’s improved over the years . Invest in a up to date macro lens to see a improvement . Btw have you checked your lens for internal dust bunnies or even the dreaded fungus ,it’s at that sort of age
Last edited:
OP
- Messages
- 7,337
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I wasnt having a dig at your photo, its just what I see but if you and others do not see it then maybe it`s me or my monitor or something.
As for my lens, theres nothing wrong with it when I bought it and theres nothing wrong with it now as far as I can tell so please do not judge my lens.
- Messages
- 15,387
- Name
- Jeff
- Edit My Images
- No
No I realise you were just using my pic as a demo ,and I was only pointing out possible causes to your problem . Sure you will sort it out one day
- Messages
- 2,247
- Name
- Brian
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I see nothing different (or wrong) when viewing the images on Flickr compared to viewing on the forum.
If you see something that nobody here can see then it must be down to the way you are viewing them.
Have you downloaded and installed the latest driver software for your graphics card?
- Messages
- 159
- Edit My Images
- No
I'm not sure if this is what you're referring to, but in this image I can see, in the bottom left corner of the top left quarter of the picture, a left facing arrow, like this, < which is lighter in colour than the surrounding area. It almost looks like screen burn from having a picture viewer open on screen for too long with the next/previous image arrows showing, though obviously it's not that.
- Messages
- 11,513
- Name
- Stewart
- Edit My Images
- Yes
OP
- Messages
- 7,337
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- Yes
This is very strange, I see it and my better half does as well,
It is seen in Nikon RAW and converted JPG
So, Why don`t you see it?
Could it be my screen ?
I use either Picasa photo viewer or Faststone image viewer as my RAW photo viewer.
Both show the same.
It is seen in Nikon RAW and converted JPG
So, Why don`t you see it?
Could it be my screen ?
I use either Picasa photo viewer or Faststone image viewer as my RAW photo viewer.
Both show the same.
- Messages
- 4,519
- Name
- droj
- Edit My Images
- No
Graham - what is this 'it'? Tell us in words.
- Messages
- 2,996
- Name
- John
- Edit My Images
- Yes
This ^^^
- Messages
- 9,590
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Have you tried cleaning your monitor
- Messages
- 159
- Edit My Images
- No
Yes, that's the exact spot, you can clearly see the left pointing arrow. If it's not that, then I've no idea what it is.
- Messages
- 2,247
- Name
- Brian
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 11,513
- Name
- Stewart
- Edit My Images
- Yes
It certainly looks like the "Previous image" link on Flickr. But if that's what it is, it means that what we're looking at is a screen grab of an image as displayed by Flickr, not the original image as uploaded to Flickr. Why would the OP do that? Surely it's easier to upload the original to TP, or link to the original on Flickr, rather than do a screen grab?
- Messages
- 5,434
- Name
- Terry
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Or test by viewing on his phone to ensure his monitor is not at fault.
It's like pulling teeth this thread.
- Messages
- 9,590
- Edit My Images
- Yes
good description there Terry
OP
- Messages
- 7,337
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- Yes
No screen grabs here, I either do from flickr or from file, and these are from file.
- Messages
- 11,513
- Name
- Stewart
- Edit My Images
- Yes
So what is that artefact then? How did it get there? Why is it in the version of the photo which appears in post #1, but not in the version which appears in post #18?
OP
- Messages
- 7,337
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- Yes
No idea, that's what I am trying to find out.So what is that artefact then? How did it get there? Why is it in the version of the photo which appears in post #1, but not in the version which appears in post #18?
- Messages
- 11,513
- Name
- Stewart
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Oh. I thought you were trying to find out what was causing "pixellation", which you could see but nobody else can, in several areas of the photo. Not one obvious artefact that we can all see.
There are lots of people here you are trying to help you, but you're really not making it easy for us.
So let's try this one step at a time.
Where did the image in post #1 come from? How did you get it onto TP, and what had you done to it before getting it onto TP?
Where did the image in post #18 come from? How did you get it onto TP, and what had you done to it before getting it onto TP?
- Messages
- 2,247
- Name
- Brian
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Same graphics card that I use - there was a driver update a few weeks ago.
Have you up dated your software, and if not, why not?
- Messages
- 2,247
- Name
- Brian
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Plus, on Flickr, the "Previous" arrow appears outside the displayed image.
However, the place it appears is in the correct position, relative to the image.
It's almost as if the arrow has been copied and added to the image.
Or banging your head against a wall...
The first image is a PNG file the others are JPG. The first is almost certainly a screen grab as evidenced by the different file format and the fact it has a 'previous image' icon superimposed.
- Messages
- 11,513
- Name
- Stewart
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 11,513
- Name
- Stewart
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Yeah, I'm starting to agree with you. It's sad really.