m9_moire

[jsjxyz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I found this

 

Caprock 67mm Anti-Moiré Filter, 8.0 - IM0053 - 8.0

 

Caprock 67mm Anti-Moiré Filter, 8.0

 

$112.99

 

 

Product Features

 

Digital photographers contantly struggle with pattern moiré and aliasing caused by the interference between repeating patterns in the subject (such as tweed or denim fabrics) and the receptors on the CCD used to capture the image.

 

Originally developed to eliminate the scan lines when photographing TV screens, Caprock has modified these optical filters for use by digital photographers, to eliminate moiré. They are also effective in eliminating aliasing ("Christmas Tree light" effect). The filters are far more effective and rugged than the fragile (and exceedingly expensive) dichroic filters offered by some manufacturers.

 

Since they are used in front of the lens when making the shot via a 67mm thread, they eliminate the problem at the source, so there is no need for electronic re-touching.

 

Used with capture-backs by Phase One, Kodak DCS, MegaVision and others , the filters diffuse the source to eliminate the interference pattern (moiré) created between the CCD array and regular, repeating patterns. Since they are optical filters, rather than soft focus, image integrity and sharpness are maintained. They are also effective in eliminating aliasing (often referred to as "Christmas tree light" effect), caused by improper software interpolation of color receptor data.

 

Four filters are available, designated as follows: 4.0, 5.6, 8.0 and 11.0. Higher number filters provide greater sharpness at the cost of less elimination of moiré. The numbers do not correspond to f-stops, but rather to the diameter of the pattern of circles that make the filters work.

 

http://www.calumetphoto.com/resources/images/prod_tnlg/a91ffa66a9ed4e83a4499a193b9605e6.jpg

[jaapv]

Jaap, you talk about home solutions for people who have time to plaing with each picture, right? Tell us how, so we can test with pleasure.

 

I am more intersted in dedicated, automated and smooth solutions, like ones which already exist in LR, are built-in, like removing of vignette or aberrations.

We need one more section with slider(s). Not playing games with manual correction of piece of frame. We already have enough of next - not liked - steps with red corners... Brrr...

 

PS: Wilson, I will try to put my RAW on FTP tonight.

PS: We can 'hide' red corners in LR manually too (graduated filter), but then often new casts appear, eg. yellow or blue...

That is fine, I don't use or know LR so somebody who does may tell you. But I do know that blanket corrections deteriorate the whole image, not just the affected area. So if you don't want to go the whole way with selecting the area, maybe a brush tool would help. It is the same with noise reduction. You can soften the whole image or remove it selectively and get a better result. Believe me, you don't have to be a pro to appreciate time-saving in post. I doubt that I have more time or inclination than you have. Which prompts me to learn as much as I can about post-processing.

[Jerry_R]

I don't use or know LR so somebody who does may tell you.

I know and use regularly LR. And there is no standard functionality to remove moire.

If someone knows tricks (that work, not guessing) to achieve that - more than welcome.

[borowiec]

I have some degree of moiré in almost every image whether from the M8 or M9, though sometimes it's only visible in very large prints (27" x 40"). I use Raw Developer which doesn't have a tool to remove moiré so I do it in Photoshop. As Jaap rightly points out, any global correction is likely to degrade the image in some way, so you want to apply the correction selectively. After trying out many different approaches, here is what I've found works best for my images (which tend to have a lot of very fine detail):

 

1. duplicate the background

2. apply a strong Gaussian blur, one where you still see some silhouette but barely, in the range of 15-20.

3. add a small amount of Noise on top of this new blurred image, around 3-5, Gaussian, monochromatic.

4. change the Blending Mode of this layer from Normal to Color

5. create a mask, fill with black, use a brush with white paint to remove the moiré effect

 

http://www.andrewborowiec.com/

[jaapv]

That is basically the same I do in CS, Andrew, but I find it useful to remove as much of the moiré colors as possible first (locally, not over the whole image) to prevent them from contaminating the blurred image. Interesting the adding of noise. What is the rationale?

[borowiec]

Jaap,

 

My method only applies the moiré removal locally, as you paint away the mask. If you follow all the steps except the last (painting away the mask), there is no change to the image at all. So in that respect, it's similar to what you do.

 

I'm afraid I can't remember why the noise is added. I came across this technique last year when I was doing extensive experiments to see how large a print I could get from an M8 file (an exercise now rendered moot by the M9), and I played with the various parameters, but I only kept notes on what procedure worked for me, nothing else.

 

Before responding to your post, I just tried comparing two versions of the same file, one using the technique I described, the other with the noise step left out, then made prints and I honestly can't see any difference. It's possible the addition of noise is superfluous but I'm just not sure. At least I know it doesn't hurt anything.

 

Andrew Borowiec

[Jerry_R]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have played slightly in LR with local changes - via Adjustment Brush. I do select area and then:

1) decrease saturation a lot (I can't select a color, just overall)

2) apply color (I use pipette, move above oryginal area in order to find best color)

Additionally contrast and\or clarity can be slightly decreased too, for smoother effect. But it is optional.

 

Hmm. What can I say. On my examples it works. Is it nice? I don't like an idea, that I would have to touch some photos... It slows down whole process...

 

But I still prefer this, than camera with low pass filter softening whole image.

 

PS: Thanks for suggestions (I tried it before, but not with desaturation, but only lowered contrast, clarity and sharpness).

[george_b]

I have just tried the C1 V5 Pro Moiré tool on the net curtain but it does not work on the JPEG. If someone could upload a horribly moiréed DNG onto a FTP site, I would have another go, to see how good it is.

 

Wilson

Hi Wilson, if you PM me your email address I'll send you an example taken with my M8 last summer in Brighton Marina. There is a good moire pattern on a guy's shirt.

[george_b]

I have played slightly in LR with local changes - . .

The point for me is that a lot of correction work just to get a clean image should not be necessary

[viramati]

I'm with George

[jaapv]

The point is that developing a film and spending time in the darkroom should not be necessary? If you want a good photo you need to input your craftmanship. Nothing has changed.

[Jerry_R]

Jaap, all is true.

I am only not happy to buy graphics software, if I already have very good RAW developer.

[AlanG]

The point is that developing a film and spending time in the darkroom should not be necessary? If you want a good photo you need to input your craftmanship. Nothing has changed.

 

Film didn't have moire. I simply shot transparency film, had it developed, and sent photos to the client or stock agency. Where does a darkroom come into the equation unless you are making prints?

[jaapv]

The remark was in general about postprocessing, not about moire specifically. I don't know about you, but for me a photograph is a print, not something ephemeral on a computer screen. And yes, there is slidefilm, I used to turn that into Cibachrome prints. Btw, what did the end user of your slide do? Print it, I suppose, out of your control. I can quite understand that it is a good way to make a living, but I respectfully suggest that it is not all there is to photography. We really come from different ends of the spectrum And moire is a pita, so it is worth it discussing remedies.

[okram]

5D mk2, 70-200 f8. four days ago.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[AlanG]

The remark was in general about postprocessing, not about moire specifically. I don't know about you, but for me a photograph is a print, not something ephemeral on a computer screen. And yes, there is slidefilm, I used to turn that into Cibachrome prints. Btw, what did the end user of your slide do? Print it, I suppose, out of your control. I can quite understand that it is a good way to make a living, but I respectfully suggest that it is not all there is to photography. We really come from different ends of the spectrum And moire is a pita, so it is worth it discussing remedies.

 

With all due respect, I have extremely extensive experience in many aspects of photographic printing. Having owned a custom color printing business (Ciba, Type R, CP) and I currently own and use two large format digital printers.

 

However I only had reason to print a very tiny percentage of my photographs. Most of my commercial photography was produced on large format transperencies as that was required by architects, magazines, and ad agnecies for my architectural and some commercial work. Medium format transparencies and slides were used for other applications. All of my stock submissions were transparencies or slides. Occassionally I shot color neg along with the transparencies when prints were needed. And later, I used NPS/NPL due to the unique abilities of those films under mixed light... and had transparencies made from them.

 

The point is that there usually would be no opportunity for me to adjust the image after the shoot so I had to get it very accurate at the time of exposure. (Later we could scan and correct digitally.) This is true for most commercial and advertising photographers even today. Considering that interiors and architectural subjects frequently contain patterns that can result in moire, I really need to use a camera/software system that avoids or suppresses the moire as much as possible since having to correct many images is time consuming and costly. And a lot of very good photographers don't even have the skills to retouch and may not want to learn them.

 

Jobs often need to be shot, converted and posted in a very short time window. Let's say that all of the images from a series has moire, you won't want to retouch all of them. So if it ends up that one of the images the client selects from that series has moire, it could be a problem for you as the client will then want you to fix it in a hurry and you may be away doing another project at that point.

 

A lot of working photographers simply can't spend the time to do any more adjusting to their images than is absolutely necessary, let alone have to look out for moire or other problems and regularly retouch or correct them. It is a completely different situation if your end result is just a few images rather than a few hundred or a few thousand images that get submitted. This is why I think the exclusion of an AA filter in the M9 was the wrong decison. (Cameras with AA filters can still exhibit moire but it seems to be less often and less obvious on them. Perhaps there is also a difference in camera firmware in this regard.) A lot of work with MF digital is shot tethered so you can spot the moire in advance and perhaps shoot from closer or further if the software won't eliminate it.

[diogenis]

Yes, but Alan, if you look a bit up, Okram shows you a photo taken with an 5dmkII that also shows moire.

Some things you have to run through pp. The dilemma here is: no moire but lose IQ? or risk a small % with pics that show a bit of moire that you can later clean using pp tools?

[Jerry_R]

Based on my eperience with 5D II and with M9 - the ratio of pictures with moire is a lot higher in case of M9.

I had 5D II longer than have M9 now - and never saw moire. With M9 I already had few photos with it.

[AlanG]

Yes, but Alan, if you look a bit up, Okram shows you a photo taken with an 5dmkII that also shows moire.

Some things you have to run through pp. The dilemma here is: no moire but lose IQ? or risk a small % with pics that show a bit of moire that you can later clean using pp tools?

 

I know that all Bayer pattern cameras can produce moire and said so in my post. In the 5DII example above you can see that the moire is suppressed a bit more than it is in the M9 examples. I also do not believe that the AA filter significantly cuts into detail as some believe. When I compared the original 5D and 50 1.8 with an M8 and 35 f2 Summicron, the M8 needed about 30% less sharpening applied in C1 than the 5D, but the final result had the 5D showing a little bit more detail.

 

In a year of using the 5DII shooting architectural exteriors and inteiors (many fabrics, grids, and tight patterns) I have only seen relatively subtle and suppressed moire a few times. (I'll try to post examples later.) I think I've seen stronger moire once or twice. This has improved significantly since the first 1Ds.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jsjxyz]

Quick question:

 

Does Moire appears in film photography?

 

Jerry