help! - pixelation problem

[Spring forest]

Hi there,

I am new to this website and wondering if someone can help me to solve the problem.
Recently I've took around 500 photos. but all of them have some distorted pixelation on top of them. One of my friends said it was due to over/under exposure. But I got over/under exposure photos all the times but never had such a result.

The 500 photos (raw) were taken indoor at night with canon 5D, F4.5~5.6, 80~125, at iso 100~200./ 580EXII. I've also used lastolite ez softbox. In fact, the photos I took without the lastolite softbox were all fine, but only those with it have the problem.

Does anyone know why I got the pixelaitions?

Thank you so much,http://www.flickr.com/photos/ekpark/4566326648/

[Jim Bryant]

Post a photo or two. If you shot at night, it just amplifies the noise by underexposing.

[Spring forest]

Hi Jim,
Thanks so much for the reply. Here is one sample.

EK

[autofocus]

no picture...just a red X

[Spring forest]

here is an sample photo.

Thanks so much
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ekpark/4566326648/

[Indigo November]

Hmm, I don't see a pixel problem. Maybe a bit of noise........not too bad.

[CiiVii]

There's a zig-zag (for lack of a better term) across the top of the image.

[Spring forest]

yes...a zig-zag..I like that term In hi res the zig-zags are really noticible.Anyone knows why I get the result? Someone said It was due to under exposure but other photos underexposed (with on camera flash) from the same night look just fine. Also, I am curious why the photos with on camera flash, (580EXII) are fine while the ones with a lastolite ez softbox and 580EXII are not. This is a bit different from the noise we commonly get from pictures taken at night or underexposed I think. Any thought? Thanks.

[OsmosisStudios]

That could be anything. Without a FULL-SIZE example we can't tell. 600x400 is far too small.

[Sime]

It looks like uploading compression - is it in the original?

S