Subject: Re: Cheap SD Cards
Full headers:
From: PeterN <"peter,newdelete">
Subject: Re: Cheap SD Cards
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2017 18:51:08 -0500
Organization: NewsGuy - Unlimited Usenet $23.95
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
<> <>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Language: en-US
X-Received-Body-CRC: 1487415237
X-Received-Bytes: 3161
Print Article
Forward Article
On 11/17/2017 6:30 PM, Bill W wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Nov 2017 12:33:18 -0500, PeterN
> <"peter,newdelete"> wrote:
>> On 11/17/2017 11:56 AM, Savageduck wrote:
>>> On Nov 17, 2017, PeterN wrote
>>> (in article<>):
>>>> On 11/16/2017 10:50 PM, Savageduck wrote:
>>>>> On Nov 16, 2017, PeterN wrote
>>>>> (in article<>):
>>>>>> Sunday I did a quick sunset shoot. Out of 46 images, several had weird
>>>>>> colors in unusual portions of the images.
>>>>> That shouldn’t be a problem for you. weird colors in unusual portions of
>>>>> the images should be right in your wheelhouse. ;-)
>>>> Not like this:
>>>> <>
>>> Yup! That looks like a corrupt file issue. As to where that corruption is
>>> happening one can best surmise that it was the card. However, there can be
>>> all sorts of causes, mostly due to current, clearing the buffer, and writing
>>> issues. So it would be best to run a check with a known good performing card
>>> to eliminate possible issues with the camera.
>>> What was the brand of the card in question, what was its rating, and which
>>> camera were you using?
>> D800, and a Delkin Black. I complained to Delkin. They are sending me a
>> reader, and requested that I test the card with that reader. The shot
>> you see is a ten shot multiple exposure. I was testing to see how much
>> time was needed between shots, to get a similar effect to a long
>> exposure. despite the corruption, my conclusion is that it can be done.
>> In a calm bay it takes about 2.5 seconds between each shot, for a ten
>> shot exposure.
> Were all of the corrupted files multiple exposure? I would consider
> the possibility that you are seeing an artifact of that process, and
> not a bad card.

Good thought, but the file i posted definitely did not show an artifact.