Grain/noise

[EJONC55]

I have posted several old slides from the 1950-1980's that have been well received. But many have been rejected because of too much noise. Does that mean only digital photos are readily acceptable? Yes, my Kodachrome slides have low grain but other film has relatively low grain which I don't think is objectionable. I have a high definition computer screen and I don't think my slides are high in grain when I view them before submitting them. Am I too tolerant or are the reviewers demanding too much of old slides ? Ed

[JRMDC]

Originally Posted by EJONC55

I have posted several old slides from the 1950-1980's that have been well received. But many have been rejected because of too much noise. Does that mean only digital photos are readily acceptable? Yes, my Kodachrome slides have low grain but other film has relatively low grain which I don't think is objectionable. I have a high definition computer screen and I don't think my slides are high in grain when I view them before submitting them. Am I too tolerant or are the reviewers demanding too much of old slides ? Ed

A) tons of scanned slide shots from that era on RP
b) I personally welcome any RP demand that posters of slide shots do some improvements to them
c) if anything I would say RP is highly inconsistent as I sometimes see scanned slide shots that have extreme issues that seem correctable, and then others don't get accepted and people come to the forum to ask why not

Show us a few of your shots - preferably by providing the URLs to the rejection pages - and let us have a look, please.

[Decapod401]

As someone who posts a lot of scanned slides, I will say that a lot of my images walk a fine line between sharpness and noise. After I sharpen the image (usually looking at the train), I try to look at the sky, and it's not unusual for noise to appear after sharpening, and then I apply some noise reduction. I process in Lightroom, and it's now my normal practice to export the processed image as a tiff, reimport the exported image, and do some additional sharpening, again looking for any noise and applying corrections.

Recently on another thread, someone (I believe that it was John West) said that processing slides is difficult, and no truer words have appeared in these forums. I processed about 40 digital images for my wife this weekend in the time that I spend to process a half-dozen slides.

Doug Lilly

[EJONC55]

Above is an example of a slide that was rejected -- it didn't look bad to me but maybe I don't see what the reviewers see.Ed
SORRY - I can't seem to enter a URL ??

[Decapod401]

Can you post the URL (www.railpictures.net/.......) to some of your rejections? The images that you tried to post did not show up.

[miningcamper1]

Originally Posted by EJONC55

Above is an example of a slide that was rejected -- it didn't look bad to me but maybe I don't see what the reviewers see.Ed
SORRY - I can't seem to enter a URL ??

Your rejection links may have expired. You could simply post the images here as attachments.

You could post a couple accepted examples here as well using this format: [photoid=xxxxxx], or post the link to your photos (from the members page).

[EJONC55]

My latest rejection was Photo ID 1460417 Thanks Ed

[Decapod401]

Ed, we can't see a rejection with just the ID number. Open the rejection, and copy the URL, as in this recent rejection that I deservedly received:

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...17&key=2956123

[miningcamper1]

Originally Posted by Decapod401

Ed, we can't see a rejection with just the ID number. Open the rejection, and copy the URL, as in this recent rejection that I deservedly received:

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...17&key=2956123

CN 6542 is an FP9A.

[Decapod401]

Originally Posted by miningcamper1

CN 6542 is an FP9A.

Duly noted - correction form submitted.