Glare from sun hitting water looks digital on Q2

[ben446]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Long time photographer and Q2 user. Just observed some images at 100%. The Q2 appears to have given up trying to process glare and translated the information as white squares.  Non water glare images are not effected. Issue is in different spots on different sun / water / glare images. Will a filter help mitigate this? Is this a Q2 issue or a digital camera issue? Was this just the wrong angle and factors? I have not notices any dust on sensor or an abundance on lens.  Attached images are at 400% and 100%

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!

Edited September 5 by ben446

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[BHollis]

Maybe I'm missing something, but looks like debris in the water to me.

[LocalHero1953]

I don't have an answer to this, but a couple of questions: electronic or digital shutter? Is that a 100% crop in the first image (i.e. are we seeing every pixel)? If not, can you post a 100% crop? 

[Stuart Richardson]

1 hour ago, ben446 said:

Long time photographer and Q2 user. Just observed some images at 100%. The Q2 appears to have given up trying to process glare and translated the information as white squares.  Non water glare images are not effected. Issue is in different spots on different sun / water / glare images. Will a filter help mitigate this? Is this a Q2 issue or a digital camera issue? Was this just the wrong angle and factors? I have not notices any dust on sensor or an abundance on lens.  Attached images are at 400% and 100%

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!

Try using "raw details" under the detail section in lightroom. That should give a better raw conversion and often removes these small artifacts. It is more of a digital issue than Q2 issue. What is happening is that the way that the camera determines color is by looking at an average of the pixels near it. The filters on digital cameras are usually arranged in a grid called a bayer matrix. When the camera cannot get enough information from the surrounding pixels (such as a blown out specular highlight) to make a proper guess, sometimes it chooses poorly, which leads to these false colors. The computationally taxing demosaicing algorithms can make better guesses, which is what that "raw details" button does. 

If that does not work, you can find a "moire" tool somewhere in there. That will desaturate these little spots and can be used as a brush. It can desaturate surrounding intense colors too though, so be mindful and only use it sparingly where needed. 

Edited September 5 by Stuart Richardson

[Stuart Richardson]

I am sorry, I thought you were talking about the little bits of color around the specular highlights. The white spots are just specular highlights that are completely blown out. If you magnify anything digital eventually it will look pixelated...that is how it is built. This should be a non-issue in a print. It's just how extremely fine detail is rendered when blown out. 

 

Edited September 5 by Stuart Richardson

[ben446]

Thanks Stuart - that's what I thought. I was having delusions of film.

Just FYI for others: Bottom image is at 100%. Shutter preference was extended and was 1/1000 so I am assuming mechanical. Not debris in the water.

Edited September 5 by ben446

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

All not of influence on these spots.  As Stuart says: just blown out specular highlights and completely normal

[jaapv]

I'm a bit puzzled what "looks digital" means though - slide film would do exactly the same.