5D3 shooting with in camera HDR

[Derryck]

Today I got to use my new 5D3 on a shoot for a restaurant client and decided to try out the new in camera HDR feature which basically shoots a three frame bracket and then produces an additional file with a processed HDR image from the three exposures. While it only works in Jpg mode I was keen to see if this could be now part of my normal workflow where images aren't generally printed large or used for the web.

My normal workflow would be to shoot a Raw 3 exposure bracket then process those Raws to PSD's, use layer masks to blend the layers in PS before finally outputting them at Tiffs (of course I could use software to do this part). This new method means that I can use in camera HDR to produce a file that's about 90% there with regards to highlight and shadow detail whilst still have RAW and Jpgs copies of the bracket if I need to go back and do it manually.

Normally I would spend about two - three hours doing this on a job like today. So if this method works I'm saving that much time per shoot day before normal retouching begins which is worth quite a lot.

Below are some examples. First is a food shot of an octopus dish with 100% crops of the Jpg (the normal exposure of the bracket), Converted Raw of the same exposure and finally an HDR from the 1-stop bracket using the Jpgs. For the Jpgs the picture profile was set to "Neutral" and the RAW converted in DPP using the same settings.

The second lot of images are of the interior using a 2-stop bracket. The first image is the normal exposure followed by the in camera processed HDR using the bracket.

[Ellis Vener]

I tried all of the different in camera HDR production settings myself. The problem is you aren't in control of the process. It is also essentially tone mapping and not true HDR.

If you use Lightroom and prefer a more normal by default HDR rendering method, try Timothy Armes Enfuse Lightroom plug-in, http://www.photographers-toolbox.com/products/lrenfuse.php , rather than the more laborious route you have been using.

[BJL]

Thanks Derryck for the examples: as a quick fix for the familiar challenge of a shaded foreground with brightly lit background, this looks promising.

It is also essentially tone mapping and not true HDR.

Ellis, what is your distinction between "true HDR" and the "tone-mapping" of this "you push the button, we do the rest" approach to handling scenes of high subject brightness range? I am sure there are cases where more careful manual adjustments are necessary to get a truly satisfying result, but for many of us it is quite attractive to have the option of getting a quick in-camera fix for this situation of high SBR. (With raw files as backups, if the shot is important enough.)


P. S. I admit that I am becoming so satisfied with most aspects of the quality of recent cameras within my constraints of cost and kit weight, at least from the latest m4/3 bodies and upwards, that I am decreasingly concerned about hair splitting comparisons of resolution, noise levels at high exposure index and such, and that leaves handling scenes of high subject brightness range as the main frontier where many cameras can still often fall short for me. So this sort of feature fits well with my increasing emphasis on finding a system that allows me to handle a large proportion of shots the old-fashioned way: planning and executing well enough that I get a usable image direct from the camera, and not having to manipulate afterward with gymnastics in the darkroom or on the computer.

[Ellis Vener]

"Ellis, what is your distinction between "true HDR" and the "tone-mapping" of this "you push the button, we do the rest" approach to handling scenes of high subject brightness range?"

BJL, rather than wait for me to rewrite a better article to explain the difference, see Armes explanation at http://photographers-toolbox.com/blog/2008/12/lrenfuse-for-interiors/

Ease of use always has it's attractions -- and limitations. I'd rather not be a desk jockey either so I completely understand where you are coming from.

[fike]

I don't really care too much about the difference (technically) between tone mapping and true HDR. Sometimes tone mapping looks great and that means it is fine to me. 

I can't see any meaningful difference in the squid pictures (ick), but the pictures of the dining room are substantially improved by the HDR function.  I know it can probably be done more precisely in post processing, but an initial look at that shot suggests a pretty good result. 

When you print or look closely at the image, do you see any ghosting around the highlight edges?  For me HDR always breaks-down when I try to do it with woodland scenes where leaves are never completely motionless (or motionless enough for pixel-perfect alignment) and halos and ghosts appear. 

Does the 5DMKIII take three distinct exposures with three different shutter opens and closes or does it capture the three frames with one shutter open/close cycle.  I am guessing the former and not the latter.  As a result, do these HDR shots need to be shot tripod mounted to look good?

[BJL]

BJL, rather than wait for me to rewrite a better article to explain the difference, see Armes explanation at http://photographers-toolbox.com/blog/2008/12/lrenfuse-for-interiors/

Thanks for the link: and of course, answering this way with a link fits my goal of avoiding unnecessary effort when there is a quicker route!

My main take-away from that description and your previous comment is:
- the standard HDR approach produces an intermediate file that can encode numerical pixel values over a very wide range (20 stops?), and then one must choose a tone-map to compress that wide range of values back into the smaller numerical range supported by the final output format (JPEG or whatever),
  whereas
- what the 5D3 seems to do is directly compute the value for each pixel in the output JPEG on the basis of the values at that pixel in the individual input frames. (Because we doubt that Canon has added 32 bit arithmetic or floating point arithmetic to its DIGIC processors, as the normal HDR approach requires.)

[Ellis Vener]

"Does the 5DMKIII take three distinct exposures with three different shutter opens and closes or does it capture the three frames with one shutter open/close cycle."

It uses the second method - at least the mirror stays up. There is a slight mechanical clicking sound so probably three seperate shutter cycles. I didn't tried it handheld .  You can program the camera for a +/-1, +/-2 or +/-3 EV spread and there are  four HDR rendering effects: Naturalistic, Artistic, Vibrant (Bold?) and Embossed. There is a similar HDR rendering program in the D800/e as well. 

[Derryck]

I certainly agree that you don't have much control over how the camera processes the three images but I would only use it in examples previously mentioned. For example when I'm shooting plated food I often have to calm down the highlights from reflections of windows on the white plate, this method when used subtly ie. +/-1EV HDR it seems to work a treat. That's why you're not seeing a big difference in the Octopus comparisons, just some added detail that wasn't in the original image without it looking fake and flat. I always try and make my retouching look as realistic as possible.

The above examples were all shot on a tripod and most of my work is. I don't recommend using it for any photography where the subject moves at all.

There is however an "Auto Image Align" setting which will combine three hand held shots (albeit carefully handheld). What happens is that it will re-crop into the image removing the outer edges that didn't match. I accidentally had this set this morning and couldn't figure out why the HDR always seemed to be cropped in.

Below is also a crop of the window in the restaurant.

Cheers, Derryck.

[Ellis Vener]

in the 5D Mk. 3 the Auto Align setting is on by default, but you can turn it off. if you shoot raw files there is an option to save the original raws as well as the tone-mapped JPEG.

[hjulenissen]

It is also essentially tone mapping and not true HDR.  

The popular term "HDR photography" is usually applied to the process of:
1)Capturing a scene using exposure bracketing
2)Synthesizing those files into one image
3)Rendering that image into a lower dynamic range suited for display/print using tonemapping

As far as I can tell, Canon would have to do steps 1)-3) in-camera, and as such be as "true" HDR as anything else, the main limitation being that all steps are automated, and only the end-result (and initial raw-files) is available to the user.

-h

[marcmccalmont]

wish they had a raw file output!
Marc

[Tony Jay]

I now own a 5D mark III so probably can reasonably comment.

I feel that the HDR feature is probably just a gimmick at this point.
It is possible that future firmware updates or later 5D models will allow for a raw file but in any case three exposures are not enough and no tone mapping algorithm can possibly intelligently place the tone curve for all (any?) images for a useful result.

The camera as a whole is formidable tool (on paper). I have only had the camera in my hands for a couple of hours so it is difficult to comment about any other features although I am optimistic for significant improvements in image quality.

My $0.02 worth.

Regards

Tony Jay

[Ellis Vener]

wish they had a raw file output!
Marc

The 5D Mark III can be set to output the individual raw files used to create the in camera processed HDR image. The HDR image itself however obviously is not a raw image. It would be nice if there were a 16 bit per channel ProPhoto RGB TIFF output option , which would be the next best thing but alas, neither Canon or Nikon (the D800 can do  the same in camera HDR trick) will do that.

Perhaps the updated but not yet released  version of Canon's DPP that handles 5D Mark III .cr2 files will have the same HDR generating sub-program but will allow you to fine tune the effects.

[Jann Lipka]

What I found good with HDR shooting is that  actual  shooting sequense is quick - the mirror is not slapping in between takes.
I would like an Firmware option for NOT saving the jpeg HDR version as it is slowing locking  the camera for a couple of seconds.
( depending on your workflow it could be better to skip useless jpeg file and  keep ONLY  the RAW sequence ) 
Skipping jpeg would make my camera ready for next shot faster. 

[hjulenissen]

What I found good with HDR shooting is that  actual  shooting sequense is quick - the mirror is not slapping in between takes.
I would like an Firmware option for NOT saving the jpeg HDR version as it is slowing locking  the camera for a couple of seconds.
( depending on your workflow it could be better to skip useless jpeg file and  keep ONLY  the RAW sequence ) 
Skipping jpeg would make my camera ready for next shot faster. 

Would not that be the same as exposure bracketing? I assume that regular EB is available in this camera.

-h

[Jann Lipka]

Yes regular bracketing is available as well.
HDR mode is a bit different - as it keeps the mirror up between shots.
( =less vibration , and faster between exposures )
Also a good thing with  mark 3 is increased span - you can use -3 to + 3 on your ( limited )
three HDR exposures.

I have been experimenting with really wide HDR - 5 exposures and also up to 3 steps between - but in practical terms
+2 /0 / -2 is a a layout that I'm coming back to .

[JohnBrew]

Ellis, have you tried the in-camera HDR on the D800? Just curious as to the results. Hint, hint. Would be nice to see an example.

[Frank Doorhof]

No need to spend hours on a HDR.
Use NIK HDRefex PRO, it has a great align and ghost engine (play with global and adaptive and the sensitivity) and does the job VERY quickly.

Select the preview you like most and start tweaking, you can even take away the effect on some parts with upoints.

I shoot my HDRs handheld and it's in 90% of the cases flawless with the alignment.
When on tripod it's awesome.

Hope this saves you some time behind the computer.

[BernardLanguillier]

Ellis, have you tried the in-camera HDR on the D800? Just curious as to the results. Hint, hint. Would be nice to see an example.

I did a few HDR tests with the D800 this morning in a hotel room.

- It only works when the camera is set to jpg mode (meaning that you have to switch from raw to jpg mode - which is best done by associating a dedicated bank of settings to HDR and by adding the switch of setting banks to your personalized menu),
- The camera takes 2 images after one another in one shutter click, this is totally transparent (similar to iphone approach I believe),
- The only degree of freedom is how many stops separates the 2 exposures, you can choose from 1 to 3 stops, and a smoothness setting controlling the radius of the mask in transition zones (halos),
- 3 stops worked fine in my indoor room example, I only used normal smoothness,
- The camera only saves the resulting jpg after a few seconds of processing, it does not save the 2 images it captured internally to generate the HDR image,
- The results seem great viewed on screen but I have not had the opportunity yet to examine them in details, I'll need a few days to do this.

On the other hand, the need for HDR for this camera is questionable considering the excellent native DR.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Petrus]

I tested HDR with D4. While the process is automatic and the result can not be tweaked afterwards (what comes to crossover points etc), it is convenient with portraits, as the two exposures are shot within a fraction of a second during the same mirror-up sequence. Even hand held shots can be combined, within reason. I suppose all new cameras (d4. D800, 5D3) have basically the same system. I shot TIFF, by the way, does D800 and 5D3 have the TIFF option?