Luminous Landscape Forum
Site & Board Matters => About This Site => Topic started by: Tony Jay on October 15, 2015, 05:16:04 am
-
I will be very interested to see what difference this update makes to dynamic range.
Four days and counting...
Tony Jay
-
I will be very interested to see what difference this update makes to dynamic range.
Four days and counting...
Tony Jay
none that you 'd want to see actually... because if a miniscule improvement in deep shadows is observed by you then you are shooting in very-very a bad light and push, push, push...
-
none that you 'd want to see actually... because if a miniscule improvement in deep shadows is observed by you then you are shooting in very-very a bad light and push, push, push...
Actually I am in the middle of a project shooting various city landmarks after dark.
The dynamic range is extreme as you can imagine and I am pushing the shadows.
The A7R II handles this quite well but lets see if better is possible.
Tony Jay
-
I will be very interested to see what difference this update makes to dynamic range.
Hi Tony,
I do not expect much difference in overall dynamic range, but only some local improvement around high contrast edges/highlights. The overall files should therefore become more robust, without the need for meticulous inspection. The noise floor remains photon shotnoise limited, and only bracketing can really solve that if detail and color needs to be preserved and noise reduction software can add little.
Cheers,
Bart
-
Yes, I agree that shot noise is the one aspect that cannot be controlled for.
We will see what happens at the other end of the DR spectrum with the highlights and edge contrast.
This update may make no difference to the way I would approach certain shooting scenarios, but then again, it might.
Tony Jay
-
Actually I am in the middle of a project shooting various city landmarks after dark.
as noted why not simply do many shots and use either exposure bracketing or what photoacute does from several unbracketed shots ?
-
as noted why not simply do many shots and use either exposure bracketing or what photoacute does from several unbracketed shots ?
Depending on the shot I already employ both these strategies.
However there are always situations where a single exposure has to suffice.
The most interesting images usually have a dynamic component as well a static one.
Tony Jay
EDIT: I do not use the Photoacute package but I do bracket and I do also use a simple Photoshop routine of stacking several images and using a median rendering.
-
If you're unfamiliar with this type of workflow, let me explain the consequences...
I use PhotoAcute... and it is quite automatic :P
-
Because it increases the amount of work to be done.
If you're unfamiliar with this type of workflow, let me explain the consequences...
When you shoot multiple exposures for a single composition, you're increasing the work required. If I shoot 5 different exposures for each scene and I do 10 scenes in a day, I've now got 50 images to review instead of 10. Now I may also choose to double up on each shot in case of something unexpected (e.g. closed eyes/birds/etc) or risk mitigation (did the camera move perceptively, focus, etc.) So now I've gone from maybe 20 images to 100.
How much time do you want to spend "picking photos" vs "developing photos"?
Getting it right when you push the button (or being able to rely on what happens when you push the button) can save you a lot of time later.
dreed is correct.
When possible one wants to capture an image with a single exposure.
If the technicalities mean one has to resort to multiple captures one does that too.
However, if a firmware update will allow an image to captured as a single capture rather than multiple then that can only be good.
I don't know yet whether this firmware update will change anything - time will tell.
Tony Jay
-
How much time do you want to spend "picking photos" vs "developing photos"?
dear... this were city landmarks after dark ... birds ? eyes ? good grass...
-
When possible one wants to capture an image with a single exposure.
when possible yes, however one can assume that your night shooting is not run & gun work with moving subjects... but we will see if there will be even 1/3 EV enhancement in usable DR... wishful thinking.
-
Perhaps it is wishful thinking but those are your words and interpretation of my posts.
I am saying that I am interested to see what differences there are, not that there necessarily will be anything that changes my shooting.
But, until you know, you don't know.
Tony Jay
-
Because it increases the amount of work to be done.
If you're unfamiliar with this type of workflow, let me explain the consequences...
When you shoot multiple exposures for a single composition, you're increasing the work required. If I shoot 5 different exposures for each scene and I do 10 scenes in a day, I've now got 50 images to review instead of 10. Now I may also choose to double up on each shot in case of something unexpected (e.g. closed eyes/birds/etc) or risk mitigation (did the camera move perceptively, focus, etc.) So now I've gone from maybe 20 images to 100.
How much time do you want to spend "picking photos" vs "developing photos"?
Getting it right when you push the button (or being able to rely on what happens when you push the button) can save you a lot of time later.
For landscapes I always bracket. In Lightroom you can change the thumbnail showing exposure compensation rather than the index number in the top left corner of the thumbnail. This makes it much easier to browse through pictures without even opening them. Also the underexposed ones will usually much show which ones has potential to work on when you do the first pass on the pictures. So I don't see the work as being multiplied as you mention. The other option is to stack based on time. I don't do this, but it is another option.
-
Will Sony eventually offer a lossless compressed RAW file?
-
Will Sony eventually offer a lossless compressed RAW file?
I have not heard anything definitive about this question.
Obviously if one goes for the 14-bit raw file on the A7R II the file size is 84Mb compared to 42Mb for the compressed raw file.
Sony is still mum on this issue.
Tony Jay
-
I have not heard anything definitive about this question.
Obviously if one goes for the 14-bit raw file on the A7R II the file size is 84Mb compared to 42Mb for the compressed raw file.
Sony is still mum on this issue.
Tony Jay
But they could offer lossless LZW compression and reduce its size roughly 50%.
-
But they could offer lossless LZW compression and reduce its size roughly 50%.
Sure, but, AFAIK there has been no word from Sony yet.
Tony Jay