• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / The Bleeding Edge / Leica M240 banding, part 3

Leica M240 banding, part 3

September 5, 2013 JimK Leave a Comment

I’m beginning to get a handle on what’s going on with the M240 shadow behavior vs camera ISO setting.

Here’s a series like that in the preceding post, but one stop more exposure, placing the average of the image values at ISO 3200 about 7 stops below full scale. The light is falling on the projection screen from the left, so you can see how the image behaves as the exposure decreases by scanning from left to right. I’ve put the hisotgrams of the raw files below the converted images so you can see what’s happening.

ISO 3200:

banding test 6p5 iso 3200

screen iso 3200

 

ISO 1600, with a one stop push in ACR:

banding test 6p5 iso 1600

screen iso 1600

 

ISO 800, with a 2-stop push in ACR:

banding test 6p5 iso 800

screen iso 800

 

ISO 400, with a 3-stop push in ACR:

banding test 6p5 iso 400

screen iso 400

 

ISO 200, with a 1-stop push in ACR:

banding test 6p5 iso 200

screen iso 200

Most of the banding is horizontal, but, as the ISO goes down and the push goes up, vertical banding becomes visible. The color shift towards the green that starts with the ISO 800 image looks to be the result of truncation of the left side of the histogram. The reason that the truncation causes the green shift is that the green channels have the highest counts, so that chopping off the left side of the histogram leaves more green than blue, and more blue than red. There may be an offset, too, but I can’t verify that from these histograms.

This explains the green shadows in the pushed images of the bookcase here.

I’m sure that it’s related to the strange noise floor behavior here.

 

The Bleeding Edge

← Leica M240 banding, part 2 Leica M240 green shadows →

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • JimK on How Sensor Noise Scales with Exposure Time
  • Štěpán Kaňa on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Štěpán Kaňa on How Sensor Noise Scales with Exposure Time
  • JimK on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Geofrey on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • JimK on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Geofrey on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Javier Sanchez on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?
  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.