I cannot get rid of those lines which look like jpeg bad compression lines… except it doezs this on my psd file…
any idea ?
try 16bit or some noise/dithering
It can be tough to avoid at times. 16bit would help alot. In this specific case though, I see no reason why you cant blur it out.
Thanks for your answers.
the lines appear after i apply a color saturation layer in photoshop… even if the settings in the layer are very light, the lines keep appearing.
I’ll try 16 bit
Have a nice day
If you already have that with the rendering…do you know how to get the gradation to dither? I always have a hard time doing this.
It’s a perennial problem you can really only solve with noise/texture in the gradients. Going to 16 bit can help, but only to avoid getting it in the first place. Once you have it converting is less helpful, and you have to stay 16bit to maintain it, which is not always possible.
Several layers of different sized and opacity grain/texture blended in is really all you can do to get rid of it AFAIK.
b
Lasso tool. Small gaussian blur.
Won’t work on actual banding. It will only make it worse or move it around.
Huh, I totally would have thought Brett was correct on that one, I’ve encountered this numerous times in creating skies in Photoshop. Is it because adjustment and paint layers in PS are introducing the banding, and blurring the flattened layers takes it out? I never understood why these show up in the first place, you’d think with 16.7 million colors you wouldn’t be able to pick out even the most subtle gradient changes.
lol. I may ask stupid questions frequently, but:
1) At least I ask them.
2) I’m not a complete noob… 
simmsimaging is actually right. This image may not be the perfect example of it since it’s actually got a wider variety of colors going on.
The problem for me usually is when someone has something that is black. They want a very very subtle color change on it, but it’s flat. Well, so you have a value of say 8 that gradates to maybe 12-16. That leaves 8 bands across the surface. Bluring that ends up making no difference. At best, it just moves around the pixels a bit.
What I really want is to somehow use the old school dither method, but slightly more random. I want to make sure the same exact color doesn’t have blocks of itself within a maximum radius. Hopefully I’m explaining that correctly.
I still haven’t been able to solve that problem. And yes, 16 bit helps a tiny tiny bit, but that still doesn’t help you display the colors on the monitor or print much.
Sorry, but I don’t think I “made it worse.” And it could have been done a lot better if I spent more than 10 seconds on it…
You are excused, but you did not get rid of the banding, you just moved it. I can see it on my screen looking at your attachment, but it’s more clear if you throw a curve on it and darken it.
You *might* get away with your fix for lo-res screen stuff, but not for print work.
Sorry man, but you can spend 10 hours with a lasso and blur tool and you’ll only chase the problem around the image. You have to look at adding random variations to the pixels through noise/textures to get rid of it. Trust me on this - it’s what I do day in and day out and I have been up against this problem more times than I care to count.
b
in this case I don’t really think it got Worse. I do agree with the others that it’s still there though. I think “moving it around” in some cases is good enough for sure. If you can’t see it, it’s good enough in most work. Just look at the movie Transformers. haha (just kidding, it’s better than I could do I’m sure).
But I agree, the only way to get rid of banding is to have noise in the image.
I was just hoping for some way of creating good smooth looking gradients like that without bands.
Few cases are good enough though. Banding is one of those problems that will come back and bite you in the ass if you try to ignore it. Far safer to get rid of it. That said, if you want to see if it is ‘good enough’ you should check the individual channels to see how it shows up. The composite channel can be more forgiving in some cases, and you don’t want it to look worse on your clients screen…
For sure though: if you have banding in RGB and you are dealing with an image for print you are *going* to have serious problems if you try to blur it/ignore it because separating to CMYK is going to make it way worse almost without fail, and it shows up on paper very quickly.
b
i dunno, blurring the sky seemed to make it look alot better. The issue for me, is as others stated, it’s all the adjustment layers and such that is usually the cause of banding. So collapsing it all isn’t a very good option, especially if you have clouds and such, that have their own subtle gradients, hanging around.
I for one never said it wasn’t better, but better is not gone, and for me not being able to apply any adjustments is effectively useless, it’s too handicapping for my line of work.
It’s misleading to think that adjustments ‘cause’ banding in most cases though. It’s a lack of detail information that is exposed by adjustments. Kind of like noise in shadows etc.
There are a lot of little tricks to help avoid exaggerating banding with adjustments, but nothing beats having a banding-free base image to work with. It’s one of the few things I really miss about the film days.
b
Like I said - I spent maybe all of 10 seconds lassoing it to a new layer, holding the selection than blurring. At first I didn’t notice the banding wasn’t ‘completely’ gone, but I’m sure I could have nuked it completely with a little more blur than I initially applied.
It is an improvement, and it works in a tight spot - especially if you don’t have time to re-render.
From a personal standpoint/preference, I think saving out to .png is always better than .jpg in post. And the higher bits you go, obviously the better.