Re: Canon Noise

From: "Jeff R." <contact.me@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2007 11:05:24 +1000

"Colin_D" <nospam@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:460d9fc5$0$16332$88260bb3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Matt Clara wrote:

http://media.the-leaky-cauldron.org/gallery/films/OOTP/Promos/High_Res_Still/HP5D-12598r.jpg

EXIF says 1D Mark II at iso 640, but the shadow grain damned awful. I
can only surmise the shot was underexposed and rescued in post process
(or Canon's noise is awful! ;-)

--
www.mattclara.com

That link doesn't work, at least with Firefox.

Working fine here, now, with FF

--
Jeff R.

.

References:
- Canon Noise
  - From: Matt Clara
- Re: Canon Noise
  - From: Colin_D

Prev by Date: Re: Anyone using a Wein safe sync on a Rebel XT?
Next by Date: Re: Canon Noise
Previous by thread: Re: Canon Noise
Next by thread: Re: Canon Noise
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Relevant Pages

Canon Noise
... EXIF says 1D Mark II at iso 640, but the shadow grain damned awful. ... only surmise the shot was underexposed and rescued in post process (or ...
(rec.photo.digital.slr-systems)
Re: Canon Noise
... EXIF says 1D Mark II at iso 640, but the shadow grain damned awful. ... can only surmise the shot was underexposed and rescued in post process ...
(rec.photo.digital.slr-systems)
Re: Canon Noise
... EXIF says 1D Mark II at iso 640, but the shadow grain damned awful. ... only surmise the shot was underexposed and rescued in post process (or ...
(rec.photo.digital.slr-systems)
Re: Canon Noise
... EXIF says 1D Mark II at iso 640, but the shadow grain damned awful. ... can only surmise the shot was underexposed and rescued in post process ...
(rec.photo.digital.slr-systems)
Re: Canon Noise
... EXIF says 1D Mark II at iso 640, but the shadow grain damned awful. ... only surmise the shot was underexposed and rescued in post process (or ... The noise is horrible, and therefore they must have done something to ...
(rec.photo.digital.slr-systems)