canon 90D in camera JPEG fine scrambles fine detail

[stuck]

This is a crop from a SOOC JPEG produced by my EFS 17-55 on my Canon 90D. Setting aside the exposure being too dark, please look at how the fine detail of the trees has been turned into a fog:

This is not a consequence of the crop and downsizing needed to be able to post it here, I can see the same effect in the full image

This is not the only example I have of this problem. Also I never saw this problem on shots from my previous Canon body (400D) and the exact same lens. The firmware of the 90D is the latest available (v1.1.1)/

Meanwhile, this similar crop is a JPEG produced from the RAW, .CR3, file. No fog in the detail.


My Googling has not been able to find anything about Canon SOOC JPEGS messing up fine details like this. Can any one here suggest what's happening?

Thanks,

stuck

[xpatUSA]

This is a crop from a SOOC JPEG produced by my EFS 17-55 on my Canon 90D. Setting aside the exposure being too dark, please look at how the fine detail of the trees has been turned into a fog:

This is not a consequence of the crop and downsizing needed to be able to post it here, I can see the same effect in the full image

This is not the only example I have of this problem. Also I never saw this problem on shots from my previous Canon body (400D) and the exact same lens. The firmware of the 90D is the latest available (v1.1.1)/

Meanwhile, this similar crop is a JPEG produced from the RAW, .CR3, file. No fog in the detail.


My Googling has not been able to find anything about Canon SOOC JPEGS messing up fine details like this. Can any one here suggest what's happening?

Indeed the fine detail was messed up by the camera.

I suspect that problem is with your JPEG settings. The detail was not completely "fogged" out, that is to say that it can recovered at some cost e.g. noise.

Voila:



Your other image for reference:



I suggest restoring the in-camera JPEG settings to factory default and especially to full size because fine detail gets under-sampled if re-sizing downward from raw.

"I'm" ... Re-shooting the scene will tell the tale ...

[pschlute]

These problems are usually caused by having noise reduction turned up too high in camera.

[stuck]

...I suggest restoring the in-camera JPEG settings to factory default...

I have never (knowingly) changed the in camera JPEG defaults, i.e. this effect is 'default' behaviour.

These problems are usually caused by having noise reduction turned up too high in camera.

OK, thanks, I'll look for that setting and turn it off. My sole use of the in-camera JPEGs is as a catalogue entry. For all other purposes I use the RAW / .CR3 file.

[xpatUSA]

Originally Posted by xpatUSA ...I suggest restoring the in-camera JPEG settings to factory default...

I have never (knowingly) changed the in-camera JPEG defaults, i.e. this effect is 'default' behaviour.

So, Stuck, may I take it that any down-sizing was applied equally to both images?

May I also ask what focal length was used (there was no EXIF in your crops)?

I do agree with Peter that excessive NR can wipe out fine detail, although I have no experience with your camera.

[dje]

Stuck if you could share your raw file via a link that could be useful. The images you've posted are so small that they're not much use for any proper analysis. The raw file will contain an embedded jpeg for reference purposes, and jpeg settings.

Dave

[xpatUSA]

Stuck if you could share your raw file via a link that could be useful. The images you've posted are so small that they're not much use for any proper analysis.

Unless they were 100% crops with no re-sizing, Dave?

[dje]

Unless they were 100% crops with no re-sizing, Dave?

Ted I don't know what sort of crops they but the two images as presented look pretty fuzzy across the board to me, not just the trees. I would like to see the total picture so to speak!

Dave

[stuck]

So, Stuck, may I take it that any down-sizing was applied equally to both images?

May I also ask what focal length was used (there was no EXIF in your crops)?

I do agree with Peter that excessive NR can wipe out fine detail...

The downsizing I applied in order to be able to upload the examples to CiC is irrelevant. These (poor) images are purely to illustrate that I regularly find that the fine detail in a SOOC JPEG has been turned into a fog, when the data in .CR3 is OK so I can produce my own JPEG that does not have fog in the detail.

The focal length was 17 but again, that's not relevant. This sort of 'fog' can show up at any FL.

Excessive NR was my own thought so it was helpful to have that idea suggested by others.

...if you could share your raw file...

Sorry, no, but thank you all for your comments.

[xpatUSA]

Ted I don't know what sort of crops they but the two images as presented look pretty fuzzy across the board to me, not just the trees. I would like to see the total picture so to speak!

Agreed, Dave.

[xpatUSA]

Originally Posted by xpatUSA So, Stuck, may I take it that any down-sizing was applied equally to both images?

May I also ask what focal length was used (there was no EXIF in your crops)?

The downsizing I applied in order to be able to upload the examples to CiC is irrelevant.

I asked because fine detail can differ if the amount of down-sizing is unequal. A lot of downsizing can even make it disappear or become aliased, especially if the original "fine detail" was at the sensor's limit, sampling-wise.

On some cameras, the JPEG may not be set to be full-size ...

... on my G9, the raw is 5184px wide and the JPEGs come out at 1920px ... that's how I have it set. As such, I would expect aliasing in the JPEG if distant details were only 2px wide. (not saying yours were).

The focal length was 17 but again, that's not relevant. This sort of 'fog' can show up at any FL.

So if the lens had been, say, 50mm for that scene at that shooting distance, would the trees still have been fogged out that bad in the JPEG? Rhetorical question, no need to respond.

My point here is that my questions, asked in good faith, should not have been dismissed as irrelevant, bearing in mind the small images posted with no EXIF.