Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: 1Ds - Half of frame is lighter  (Read 6339 times)

Jonathan Wienke

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5829
    • http://visual-vacations.com/
1Ds - Half of frame is lighter
« on: June 01, 2004, 07:03:39 pm »

[font color=\'#000000\']You can't underexpose frames with large dark areas with no detail or you'll get banding like that. Increase exposure and/or shoot bracketed frames and combine in PS. If you have to push more than 1 stop in PS or you RAW converter, then re-shoot.[/font]
Logged

jwarthman

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 99
1Ds - Half of frame is lighter
« Reply #1 on: June 03, 2004, 02:19:08 am »

[font color=\'#000000\']
Quote
Quote
Perhaps one way to reduce this problem is to avoid underexposure like the plague.
This is ridiculous! Avoid underexposure like the plage  ??? . The dynamic range of Canon DSLRs depends upon underexposure and 'bringing out' the shadows. Exposure compensation in C1 and PS is brilliant at this.

Many a time with my D60, shooting sunlit waterfalls in the rain forest, I've had to expose for the highlights creating totally ( and unnaturally) black shadows elsewhere. EC in PS has been brilliant in restoring detail in these shadows.
Ray,
Frankly, I wish it was ridiculous. But alas, it's not...

Did you read the thread on DPReview? (See my earlier post.) You really must check out the examples mentioned there.

Like you, I used exposure compensation when needed with my D30 images, and have recovered much shadow detail. But the original poster wasn't talking about the D30, or the D60 for that matter.  The 1Ds is a different beast. As others here (and on DPReview) have said, there are issues with banding, especially when you use exposure compensation.
Enjoy!

-- Jim[/font]
Logged

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10365
1Ds - Half of frame is lighter
« Reply #2 on: June 04, 2004, 12:51:09 am »

Quote
[font color=\'#000000\']That generally isn't a problem. The only shots I've ever seen banding with my 1Ds (~50 out of 40,000) have been underexposed by at least a stop for the whole image.[/font]
[font color=\'#000000\']Well that brings matters into perspective. If you've got the right (desired) exposure in the first place and you're manipulating the one image in PS, then it's not so much of a problem.

However, something I've discovered quite recently, blending two images with different EC settings at the time of conversion from RAW, produces the best detail in the shadows. Ie., if the image is exposed for the highlights, try blending the 0 EC image with the same image with +4 EC at conversion.

How does the 1Ds handle this?[/font]
Logged

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10365
1Ds - Half of frame is lighter
« Reply #3 on: June 04, 2004, 09:56:38 am »

Quote
[font color=\'#000000\']
Quote
However, something I've discovered quite recently, blending two images with different EC settings at the time of conversion from RAW, produces the best detail in the shadows. Ie., if the image is exposed for the highlights, try blending the 0 EC image with the same image with +4 EC at conversion.

How does the 1Ds handle this?

I think that's what I suggested in the second message of the thread! With my 1Ds, this works very well.[/font]
[font color=\'#000000\']Are we talking about the same thing here. Blending two separate exposures is the ideal, but in situations where one has only one image with really deep shadows because it was exposed for the highlights and it was a contrasty scene, creating your own second exposure in ACR (+4 EC) for blending purposes can be worthwhile in my experience.

I get a sense this would be troublesome with the 1Ds, but perhaps the banding would be reduced in the blending process  ???[/font]
Logged

Jonathan Wienke

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5829
    • http://visual-vacations.com/
1Ds - Half of frame is lighter
« Reply #4 on: January 08, 2005, 02:20:15 pm »

No camera will let you underexpose by any arbitrary amount and push the RAW conversion to compensate and give optimum results. You can't do that with film, why would you expect to do that with digital?

I do a lot of no-flash concert photography in low-light conditions and have to deal with that exact problem. Get closer and use wider lenses; they'll let you get away with slower shutter speeds. Don't be afraid to turn up the ISO setting; a properly exposed ISO 800 shot will always be better than an ISO 400 shot underexposed 1 stop. If you're already maxed out on ISO, get faster glass. f/2.8 is the bare minimum for concert/theater work, some situations require f/2 or even faster apertures. Get some primes; they'll work in conditions no zoom will deliver the goods as long as you have any freedom of movement to get the right framing.

If theater is your main line of work, consider selling the 1Ds and getting a 1D-MkII. It has better noise performance (ISO 1600 is about the same as ISO640 on the 1Ds) and you can go up to 3200 in a pinch. Above ISO 400 the lower noise level of the 1D-MkII cancels out the megapixel advantage of the 1Ds. I have both cameras and use the 1D-MkII for concert stuff and the 1Ds for portraits and studio work where I can stay below ISO 200.
Logged

jwjohnson

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24
    • http://www.jjsviewbox.com/
1Ds - Half of frame is lighter
« Reply #5 on: May 30, 2004, 12:22:47 am »

[font color=\'#000000\']I've just discovered what I think is a problem with my Canon EOS 1Ds.  Images that are dark to begin with have the lower half (in a horizontal image) lighter than the upper part. I've tried converting raw images with Capture One, Photoshop Camera Raw, and Canon's software.  All give essentially the same result.  If I let the dark areas go black, the problem goes away, but I lose the shadow detail.

I've posted a couple of samples on my website here.

I'm thinking I need to send the camera in to Canon.  Any thoughts or suggestions would be appreciated.

Thanks.[/font]
Logged

sergio

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 666
    • http://www.sergiobartelsman.com
1Ds - Half of frame is lighter
« Reply #6 on: May 30, 2004, 01:18:52 pm »

[font color=\'#000000\']I have exactly the same problem with my 1Ds. Just have to be very careful with dark zones that contain detail. I found that exposing perfectly avoids making big moves in curves in the shadow region which is what generally shows this terrible flaw.[/font]
Logged

didger

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2030
1Ds - Half of frame is lighter
« Reply #7 on: June 02, 2004, 04:45:46 am »

[font color=\'#000000\']I'm glad to have gotten this warning before perhaps taking some disappointing shots in a hard to get to area!  With compact flash at $200 for 4 gb, it's no problem to bracket anything at all questionable.  It's also so easy to delete obvious failures right on the spot, so no point in shooting conservatively.  Even with film cameras pros tend to shoot an incredible overkill number of shots for any given situation.  With digital even amateurs can be profligates with no punishment.[/font]
Logged

jwjohnson

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24
    • http://www.jjsviewbox.com/
1Ds - Half of frame is lighter
« Reply #8 on: June 02, 2004, 01:09:17 pm »

[font color=\'#000000\']I've always tried to expose for the highlights and let the shadows fall where they may.  On the sample images, there is less than one stop exposure adjustment in C1.  This isn't just noise that I would expect to see in dark areas if I increase exposure too much in the conversion/post processing.  If it were it should affect all the shadows, and not just those in the lower half of the frame.  Canon has advised me to send the camera to them for problems with the sensor.  I'll let you know what the end result of that is.  Unfortunately, I've got a shoot planned in 10 days.  I'll just take the 1Ds on that trip,  try to take backups of any frames with dark areas with my 10D.  Then I'll send the 1Ds in when I get back.[/font]
Logged

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10365
1Ds - Half of frame is lighter
« Reply #9 on: June 03, 2004, 10:01:41 am »

[font color=\'#000000\']Jim,
What about correct exposure for the highlights in a contrasty scene and shadows brought out with PS CS  'shadow/highlight' control? Similar banding problem?[/font]
Logged

Jonathan Wienke

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5829
    • http://visual-vacations.com/
1Ds - Half of frame is lighter
« Reply #10 on: June 03, 2004, 05:51:43 pm »

[font color=\'#000000\']That generally isn't a problem. The only shots I've ever seen banding with my 1Ds (~50 out of 40,000) have been underexposed by at least a stop for the whole image.[/font]
Logged

jwarthman

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 99
1Ds - Half of frame is lighter
« Reply #11 on: June 03, 2004, 11:23:02 pm »

[font color=\'#000000\']Boku,
What are you talking about - gluing two chips together? Why does it matter how the camera is built, as long as it takes decent photographs, is easy to use, and is sufficiently rugged?

Enjoy!

-- Jim[/font]
Logged

jwarthman

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 99
1Ds - Half of frame is lighter
« Reply #12 on: June 04, 2004, 02:05:09 am »

[font color=\'#000000\']
Quote
Well that brings matters into perspective. If you've got the right (desired) exposure in the first place and you're manipulating the one image in PS, then it's not so much of a problem.
Ray,
I suppose how big a problem it is depends upon the tonality of the scene you're photographing. A "well exposed" image consisting of stars and, say, a full moon, has a good chance, on the 1Ds, to exhibit the banding. That's an extrememe example (you still haven't said if you read that thread on DPReview). but I know people who have the problem with well-exposed images that aren't shot at night.

Quote
However, something I've discovered quite recently, blending two images with different EC settings at the time of conversion from RAW, produces the best detail in the shadows. Ie., if the image is exposed for the highlights, try blending the 0 EC image with the same image with +4 EC at conversion.

How does the 1Ds handle this?

I think that's what I suggested in the second message of the thread! With my 1Ds, this works very well.

Enjoy!

-- Jim[/font]
Logged

dover

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2
1Ds - Half of frame is lighter
« Reply #13 on: January 08, 2005, 01:19:03 am »

For what it may be worth at this late date (considering the age of the last post), I also see the same banding problem on my 1Ds. The pattern is different -- a band of lesser noise from about 700 to about 1400 pixels from the top of a horizontal image -- but the principle is the same.

Unfortunately, this is a not a theoretical problem of the occasional underexposed image for me. I do a great deal of candid theater photography, and in dimly lit scenes have to rely on shooting at whatever shutter speed is needed to stop motion, using EC in Photoshop to make seriously underexposed images usable. Under these conditions, the banding is visible not just in the shadows (which, I agree, one could simply sacrifice) but also in midtones. I could deal just fine with a high noise level as long as it was uniform across the image, but the presence of the banding is a killer.

I share the disappointment of other 1Ds owners who are unpleasantly surprised to find such a defect -- and defect it surely is -- in this very expensive camera. Had I known of it, I would not have made the purchase.

-- Bob March
Logged

dover

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2
1Ds - Half of frame is lighter
« Reply #14 on: January 10, 2005, 11:32:49 pm »

Jonathan --

Thanks very much for your very helpful reply. It's given me several things to think about.

I'm sorry if I gave the impression that I expected to be able to underexpose by any amount I pleased and still get good results. I agree that that would be pretty unreasonable. I had chosen to underexpose at low ISO's (100 whenever I could) and use exposure compensation in ACR, rather than expose correctly (or closer to correctly) at higher ISO's, because I had been told by someone I had reason to trust that I would get lower total noise that way.

I appreciate the evaluation of lenses for stage photography, too. Most of my theater photography has been done with a 70-200 2.8L, so I have a start, perhaps, on suitable glass.

A second camera body was definitely on the horizon, anyway, so I'll take your advice on the 1D MkII if circumstances permit. In any event, I'll now be very careful to check noise levels and banding in any model I'm considering. And in any specific unit, too; based on what I know so far about the banding phenomenon on the 1Ds, it's clear that it's different on different units in which it's present, while being wholly absent from others.

Thanks,

Bob
Logged

jwarthman

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 99
1Ds - Half of frame is lighter
« Reply #15 on: June 04, 2004, 09:29:06 am »

Quote
[font color=\'#000000\']Since the effects are exaggerated, I wonder what's the significance in practice. The example in dpreview could be easily fixed by darkening the sky. Sky has no detail. A better example would be of material where there is detail.[/font]
[font color=\'#000000\']Ray,
I agree, navigating DPReview is tedious.

If you're interested in more examples, I'm confident that a search of robgalbraith.com or fredmiranda.com will give you some. For that matter, Jeff's example at the top of this thread shows the banding in dark areas containing detail.

Enjoy!

-- Jim[/font]
Logged

jwarthman

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 99
1Ds - Half of frame is lighter
« Reply #16 on: June 05, 2004, 12:40:20 pm »

[font color=\'#000000\']Ray,
My apologies - you were talking about layering two versions of the same image, I was talking about layering two differently exposed images.

In any case, the 1D Mark II will perform much, much better in your scenario than the 1Ds. Applying a +4 EV exposure compensation to a well-exposed 1Ds RAW file will produce significant noise and, in some cases, the banding we've been discussing.

Enjoy!

-- Jim[/font]
Logged

jwarthman

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 99
1Ds - Half of frame is lighter
« Reply #17 on: May 30, 2004, 12:43:14 pm »

[font color=\'#000000\']Jeff,
You're seeing a well-document artifact of the 1Ds. Not pretty, is it? For more on the subject, take a look at this DPReview thread. Stan has the 1Ds, and also has the problem you describe. He borrowed a 1D Mark II in order to compare with his 1Ds - and this problem is totally non-existant, at least on his borrowed 1D Mark II. Be sure to take a look at his sample images - they'll look familiar to you.  :-)

Perhaps one way to reduce this problem is to avoid underexposure like the plague. If possible, expose once for highlights, a second time for shadows, and combine the images in Photoshop or equivalent.

Enjoy!

-- Jim[/font]
Logged

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10365
1Ds - Half of frame is lighter
« Reply #18 on: June 02, 2004, 12:55:45 pm »

Quote
[font color=\'#000000\']Perhaps one way to reduce this problem is to avoid underexposure like the plague.[/font]
[font color=\'#000000\']This is ridiculous! Avoid underexposure like the plage  ??? . The dynamic range of Canon DSLRs depends upon underexposure and 'bringing out' the shadows. Exposure compensation in C1 and PS is brilliant at this.

Many a time with my D60, shooting sunlit waterfalls in the rain forest, I've had to expose for the highlights creating totally ( and unnaturally) black shadows elsewhere. EC in PS has been brilliant in restoring detail in these shadows.[/font]
Logged

boku

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1493
    • http://www.bobkulonphoto.com
1Ds - Half of frame is lighter
« Reply #19 on: June 03, 2004, 07:57:37 pm »

[font color=\'#000000\']Man I'm sure the 1Ds is a great camera and all -- h_e_l_l, I'd buy one of I had the bucks and the rationale. But...

8 grand and they have to glue two chips together? I'm sure it a great way of making more from less, but...

8 GRAND AND THEY HAVE TO GLUE TWO CHIPS TOGETHER?

Sheesh![/font]
Logged
Bob Kulon

Oh, one more thing...[b
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up