Cause of Vertical Banding in Photo?

[Pokie]

I'm looking for some help in identifying the culprit behind the horizontal banding in the photo.
It's most visible in the yellow leaves or other bright objects in motion.
I have this in several pictures taken from a foot bridge. The bridge was bouncy and I was going to blame it on the bridge.
But...I have the same thing in several pictures taken from a huge rock embedded in the ground.
Is this likely caused by bounce from the mirror?
I didn't use the mirror lock-up, but did use a very steady tripod in what I thought was a rock solid position, and used the timer delay to take the shot.
In some of the longer exposures of 6 to 14 seconds the banding is visible - and equal - through the entire range of motion of some of the leaves.
Is mirror bounce likely to affect an entire 14 second exposure evenly? I would think it would diminish through the exposure.
If not mirror bounce, any other ideas?



Thanks,
Pokie

[gldiana]

Typically banding happens when shooting at high ISO.

[Edd]

Could it be a printer problem ????

I know on my crappy printer banding is nearly always present unless you select the highest quality for printing.

I have read somewhere banding can be quite common for some printers.

Ed

[gldiana]

Most definitely.
I didn't realize you were posting a photo scanned from a hard copy.

[Pokie]

Thanks all.

These weren't scanned - all shot with ISO 100.
I wish I had shot a vertical to see if the banding would rotate 90 deg with the camera, but I didn't.
I couldn't see the banding in the camera LCD, so I didn't catch until home.
I think it has to be vibrations from the shutter, but still not sure why it's so even.
I'll run some trials, but haven't figured out what to shoot that will have continuous motion to test.

[gldiana]

Sorry, I read Ed's post about the printer problem without reading that it was from him and I thought it was yours.
I don't know if it's my screen, but I can't see any banding, not even in the enlarged part.

[hw771230]

Have you thought about inconsistent velocity of the water? Sounds crazy, but water does not always move at the same rate. Are you seeing this in any shots other than slow moving water? The exposures you are using seem too long to get mirror bounce, unless you are using a rubber tripod

Caleb

[Edd]

Sorry guys I thought this was a printed image

My only stab would be compression if shot in JPG or when converted to JPG. ????

But much like Luca I can't see any banding but there again it may be my monitor.

Ed

[Mitchell]

I only see horizontal banding, it looks like it may be vibration in the camera the way the bands are...

[Pokie]

Thanks all!
I've solved it and feel a little foolish
Oh - and it's not the tripod - my Bogen 3021 isn't rubber. Believe the guy who hauled it up and back a 4 mile mountain.
HW - you sent me in the right direction.

Take a look at the picture below.
Top inset (area with no motion) is sharp (or sharp enough before size reduction for posting)
Left inset shows some "waviness" of areas in motion, but only a little.
Right inset shows a lot of banding or waviness of the leaves in motion. Appears to be unidirectional (horizontal) and very equal.

If this were camera movement, then the top inset would be blurry, and the leaves and bubbles in motion in the left inset would have the same banding as the other areas in motion.
The answer has to be subject movement.
So what would cause uneven subject movement in a pool of water between left inset and right inset?
Ripples.
The area of the left inset was protected from the ripples coming across the pool, thus no banding.

I saw it in almost every picture because most of my pictures were focused on the same area of the pool - the larger mass of leaves in motion.
The motion appeared horizontal in all pictures because of my positioning - whether on the bridge or the rock below the bridge I was always on the same side of the pool where the ripples were coming at me.

I don't recall if there was a breeze from the upper right side of the photo, or if there may have been a continuous wave caused by the rapids.
Either way I caught a standing wave in the pool.

If I had the inclination, I could take the various exposure times, count the ripples and determine the wave period..{time gap}..OK I just did - 0.4 seconds.

Anyway, I thought I had myself set up for some great 'leaves-in-motion' pictures.
Best of them isn't much more than 'interesting'.
Details matter. Details matter. Details matter! DETAILS MATTER!!!

[hw771230]

Pokie,

Glad to hear you figured it out. It seemed to me that the exposures were too long for mirror bounce. Also glad to hear you are not using a rubber tripod

Still a beautiful shot. I like the last one even more. Perhaps an even longer exposure would have covers up some of that "banding"/waviness

Caleb

[gldiana]

Told you I couldn't see any banding in the photo...
banding is typically a (or more) wide bar(s) of a different color caused by the processor/sensor in low light conditions.