Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-10-2007, 08:58 PM   #16
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Buffalo/Rochester, NY
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,133
The whole issue of softness might be a critical issue for those of us who want super-crisp, super sharp images when shooting super-detailed subjects (i.e. insect macro-photography).

But I find it odd, and don't think anyone has made this point, to expect super-sharpness from a compressed, somewhat "lossy" compression algorithm as is JPG, set up by Pentax the way they think a JPG should look, and with limited changes allowed via the menus. In the end, those JPGs will look just like Pentax thinks they should and well within their specs.

The same argument comes up in the audio realm when comparing OOG to mp3s to AAC to WAV etc - Audio-philes would bust a kidney if someone told them they had to rip their CDs using good ole "lossy" mp3. And like in the audio world, some people swear they can hear the difference between a 192 KHz mp3 and a OOG file.

If you want sharp, crisp images and fine detail is a must, don't shoot JPG. It's not like Pentax didn't give us two alternatives, PEF and DNG to go with, plus an easy way to batch convert a whole load of images at once. Had PEF and DNGs come out fuzzy out of the camera, well... this would be a whole different argument altogether.
I myself find I can get the sharpest jpegs once I process the photo with MS Paint

09-10-2007, 10:22 PM   #17
Inactive Account




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 44
NO
Check this out DCRP Review: Pentax K10D
I shoot raw + jpeg with settings: image tone Bright, Saturation= -1, Sharpness= 0 contrast= 0 the settings do make a difference.
09-11-2007, 06:54 AM   #18
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,934
QuoteOriginally posted by *isteve Quote
As usual you are talking rubbish. Silkypix produces extremely sharp images from RAW. The Pentax Photolab sharpening settings are different, even though it uses the Silkypix software. Both can be modified.

I wish you would shut up and stop taking about things you know nothing about.
I may know nothing. But while Phil Askey and Klaus Schroiff are exactly saying the same thing, that is, soft in-camera jpeg and soft RAW converted images with original Pentax Photo Lab with the SilkyPix engine, I can't see you actually have any reason to say what I quote from both sources for their findings are rubbish.

As long as you can convince both authorities to shut up and to withdraw their findings and to tell us that they have been wrong, I can't see any reason that I should *be* "shut up".

Also, here is a forum, how can YOU shut up someone else and stop him from expressing his points and opinions? It just seems that you have NO point to counter react but just know to "shut up" your opponent.
09-11-2007, 07:01 AM   #19
Senior Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 269
QuoteOriginally posted by Frogroast Quote
The whole issue of softness might be a critical issue for those of us who want super-crisp, super sharp images when shooting super-detailed subjects (i.e. insect macro-photography).

But I find it odd, and don't think anyone has made this point, to expect super-sharpness from a compressed, somewhat "lossy" compression algorithm as is JPG, set up by Pentax the way they think a JPG should look, and with limited changes allowed via the menus. In the end, those JPGs will look just like Pentax thinks they should and well within their specs.

The same argument comes up in the audio realm when comparing OOG to mp3s to AAC to WAV etc - Audio-philes would bust a kidney if someone told them they had to rip their CDs using good ole "lossy" mp3. And like in the audio world, some people swear they can hear the difference between a 192 KHz mp3 and a OOG file.

If you want sharp, crisp images and fine detail is a must, don't shoot JPG. It's not like Pentax didn't give us two alternatives, PEF and DNG to go with, plus an easy way to batch convert a whole load of images at once. Had PEF and DNGs come out fuzzy out of the camera, well... this would be a whole different argument altogether.
I myself find I can get the sharpest jpegs once I process the photo with MS Paint
You make good points, but remember, Pentax (at least for the K10D) has left the user with plenty of options for fine tuning the JPEGs in-camera.

Ted

09-11-2007, 07:05 AM   #20
Senior Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 269
QuoteOriginally posted by RiceHigh Quote
I may know nothing. But while Phil Askey and Klaus Schroiff are exactly saying the same thing, that is, soft in-camera jpeg and soft RAW converted images with original Pentax Photo Lab with the SilkyPix engine, I can't see you actually have any reason to say what I quote from both sources for their findings are rubbish.

As long as you can convince both authorities to shut up and to withdraw their findings and to tell us that they have been wrong, I can't see any reason that I should *be* "shut up".

Also, here is a forum, how can YOU shut up someone else and stop him from expressing his points and opinions? It just seems that you have NO point to counter react but just know to "shut up" your opponent.
It is absolutely true about what Phil Askey said about the K10d's JPEGs. However, he never tested the JPEGs in bright mode and with the sharpness bumped up. I believe had that been done, there never would have been an issue in the first place.

Regards,

Ted
09-11-2007, 07:09 AM   #21
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,934
QuoteOriginally posted by Tbear Quote
It is absolutely true about what Phil Askey said about the K10d's JPEGs. However, he never tested the JPEGs in bright mode and with the sharpness bumped up. I believe had that been done, there never would have been an issue in the first place.

Regards,

Ted
Bright mode is just a more exaggerated brightness/color tone curve and is nothing to do with the detailness of the jpegs.

Also, (more) sharpening will give you images that look sharper but also have nothing to do with (more) resolution. The reverse may be true, i.e., sharpening may destroy resolution.
09-11-2007, 07:19 AM   #22
Senior Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 269
QuoteOriginally posted by RiceHigh Quote
Bright mode is just a more exaggerated brightness/color tone curve and is nothing to do with the detailness of the jpegs.

Also, (more) sharpening will give you images that look sharper but also have nothing to do with (more) resolution. The reverse may be true, i.e., sharpening may destroy resolution.
First of all, I never claimed or implied that sharpening increases resolution. Second, I just re-read Phil's review of the K10D, specifically the parts where he discusses the JPEGs. He never states that there was a problem with resolution. This is in fact what he does state: "In-camera image processor unable to deliver crisp sharp edges"

Therefore, since the problem is NOT resolution, bumping up the sharpness in-camera WILL take care of the "problem" (and in fact does IMHO).
09-11-2007, 07:33 AM   #23
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,934
QuoteOriginally posted by Tbear Quote
First of all, I never claimed or implied that sharpening increases resolution. Second, I just re-read Phil's review of the K10D, specifically the parts where he discusses the JPEGs. He never states that there was a problem with resolution. This is in fact what he does state: "In-camera image processor unable to deliver crisp sharp edges"

Therefore, since the problem is NOT resolution, bumping up the sharpness in-camera WILL take care of the "problem" (and in fact does IMHO).
How about if you are to compare the resolution charts and figures?

09-11-2007, 08:10 AM   #24
Senior Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 269
QuoteOriginally posted by RiceHigh Quote
How about if you are to compare the resolution charts and figures?
Sorry Rice, but you seem to be losing sight of the OP, which is a discussion about possible JPEG softness. I believe my posts were on topic, but your attempt to ignore my logical response to your last post and then resort to "bait and switch" (trying to change the topic to one about resolution instead of JPEG "softness") will not work with me.

Regards,

Ted
09-11-2007, 08:15 AM   #25
Veteran Member
*isteve's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London, England
Posts: 1,187
QuoteOriginally posted by RiceHigh Quote
I may know nothing. But while Phil Askey and Klaus Schroiff are exactly saying the same thing, that is, soft in-camera jpeg and soft RAW converted images with original Pentax Photo Lab with the SilkyPix engine, I can't see you actually have any reason to say what I quote from both sources for their findings are rubbish.

As long as you can convince both authorities to shut up and to withdraw their findings and to tell us that they have been wrong, I can't see any reason that I should *be* "shut up".

Also, here is a forum, how can YOU shut up someone else and stop him from expressing his points and opinions? It just seems that you have NO point to counter react but just know to "shut up" your opponent.
Your original post said....

"Do note also that shooting RAW won't help if you use Silkypix or Pentax Photo Lab. Using ACR or RawTherapee etc. can get sharper pictures out of the K10D RAW but you'll get also (much) noiser images."

I'm sorry but Silkypix native application does NOT produce the same output as Pentax Photo Lab . Native Silkypix uses multiple edge and detail sharpening settings not available to PhotoLab.

I am not saying that PhotoLab does a better job than JPEG, I am saying Silkypix does a much better job than PhotoLab.

If you insist on stating opinions dressed up as facts which also hapen to be incorrect then I am free to point it out and there is nothing you can do about it.
09-11-2007, 08:56 AM   #26
Veteran Member
jeffkrol's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wisconsin USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,435
QuoteOriginally posted by Tbear Quote
Sorry Rice, but you seem to be losing sight of the OP, which is a discussion about possible JPEG softness. I believe my posts were on topic, but your attempt to ignore my logical response to your last post and then resort to "bait and switch" (trying to change the topic to one about resolution instead of JPEG "softness") will not work with me.

Regards,

Ted
Sorry Ted, that's all he's good for. might as well discuss to a wall... Standard Ricehigh mode of operation.... frustrating isn't it..........
09-11-2007, 10:26 AM   #27
Senior Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 269
QuoteOriginally posted by jeffkrol Quote
Sorry Ted, that's all he's good for. might as well discuss to a wall... Standard Ricehigh mode of operation.... frustrating isn't it..........
Yes, it certainly can be frustrating. But, I have learned the hard way, that it is better to just leave my emotions out of it and use logic and reason to tear apart faulty arguments (while simultaneously not trying to personally attack the poster). Easier said than done sometimes.

Regards,

Ted
09-11-2007, 11:25 AM   #28
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Boston, PRofMA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,053
Hate to say it, but I'd have to agree w/ RiceHigh. How helpful to the OP is "shut up" and "this is rubbish"?

FWIW, I went through a long shopping process w/ a friend who ended up w/ a D80 who was also stuck on the soft JPEG issue. I don't see anything wrong w/ Phil's analysis of the sharpening issue. I believe the problem is in the hardware and is related to the weak AA filter in the vertical direction that also causes the x-mas tree lights symptom mentioned in the imaging-resource review. It won't be addressed w/o a chip/board fix (that and the VPN issue).

The default JPEG output on the K10D doesn't bother me as much as I thought it would. The OP should just take a memory card and go to a decent camera store and ask to fire off a bunch of test pics to compare. If you get deeper into digital photography and dSLR use, you'll end up using RAW in at least the important events because it lets you recover significantly more pictures that have blown highlights or bad exposures (and even the D80 friend has realized this).

Figure out whether you want the K10D's features or whatever other dSLR, plan to keep it for about 2 years before the next big update, and go *take pictures to keep memories of*. The K10D is well beyond my photographic abilities and I suspect most others except the obvious ones like Benjikan (who apparently has disappeared as he strongly considers the D300...just kidding :-). Even w/ a cheapo $150 consumer lens like a Tamron, it's craploads better than a P&S cam's lousy tiny lens...

Last edited by kenyee; 09-11-2007 at 11:31 AM.
09-11-2007, 11:29 AM   #29
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: LI, NY
Posts: 313
QuoteOriginally posted by Tbear Quote
It is absolutely true about what Phil Askey said about the K10d's JPEGs. However, he never tested the JPEGs in bright mode and with the sharpness bumped up.

Therefore, since the problem is NOT resolution, bumping up the sharpness in-camera WILL take care of the "problem"
This is misinformation and is one reason why Pentax never will tweak the JPG or sharpening algorithm in firmware if possible.

Phil DID test these settings. The simple problem is type of sharpening Pentax permits us to have in-camera. It is only textural, with no edge sharpening option. Hence a user who needs sharp edges out of the camera for a specific instance can't have it, as Phil specifically tried to accomplish.

As you also remind us:

QuoteOriginally posted by Tbear Quote
This is in fact what he does state: "In-camera image processor unable to deliver crisp sharp edges"

Even though it would completely eliminate the issue, Pentax won't or can't offer further sharpness options within a menu interface by firmware update that includes the choice of edge sharpening.

Of course, it would be better, profitwise, for them to fix this in the next model, and expect you to buy that if you are not satisfied with current K10D limited effect textural sharpening.
09-11-2007, 11:31 AM   #30
Veteran Member
jeffkrol's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wisconsin USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,435
QuoteOriginally posted by Tbear Quote
Yes, it certainly can be frustrating. But, I have learned the hard way, that it is better to just leave my emotions out of it and use logic and reason to tear apart faulty arguments (while simultaneously not trying to personally attack the poster). Easier said than done sometimes.

Regards,

Ted
Problem is you can throw all the facts you want at him but the opinion or his "conclusions" never change. This goes back to the D days and why he was banned from dpreview....
As an example:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/11670-where-pentax-whats-next-6.html
I, unfortunately, go back way too far w/ him and have seen the pattern for years and, even more unfortunately, cannot always keep it so civil when faced w/ such arrogance and pig headed determination to be "correct".
His name and posts come up way too high and too often in serch engines to be ignored. I suppose I have a bit to do with that itself. Maybe I'm a bit guilty of the same but his continual posts and rants really do impact the "reputation" of Pentax, though at times they themselves don't help matters. So I continue to offer a counterpoint to his "opinions". He won't go away, neither will I.
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=37790811&postID=5257110237331737737
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, detail, dslr, jpeg, k10d, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New K10D and JPEG clevo Pentax DSLR Discussion 21 01-22-2008 06:09 AM
Another K10D Jpeg vs Raw Test kb244 Pentax DSLR Discussion 28 12-14-2007 06:15 AM
K10d JPEG quality rwa Pentax DSLR Discussion 35 11-29-2007 09:34 AM
What is your favorite K10D Jpeg setting? anthropas Photographic Technique 19 08-16-2007 09:16 AM
Some K10D Jpeg samples ... Lisa_Bonami Pentax DSLR Discussion 13 12-29-2006 09:30 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:37 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top