Luminous Landscape Forum

Equipment & Techniques => Digital Cameras & Shooting Techniques => Topic started by: Guillermo Luijk on March 25, 2009, 07:02:28 am

Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: Guillermo Luijk on March 25, 2009, 07:02:28 am
Sometimes I wonder if I am such a strange user to be praying for RAW histograms and automatic ETTR (Expose to the right) mode on my camera.
If many users shoot RAW, why after 4 years of DSLR we are still looking at JPEG histograms and clipped info? why are we doing endless trial/error shots to _try to achieve_ an optimum ETTR of the RAW channels instead of having the tools to easily _achieve_ it? why cameras measure light and calculate exposure to obtain a pleasant JPEG instead of optimised RAW data? why not allow both modes of operation? JPEG-oriented and RAW-oriented.


RAW HISTOGRAMS

All the mess of UniWB wouldn't make sense if just cameras would allow to display the undemosaiced RAW histograms, which are simpler to calculate and display than the JPEG histograms. Why not allow the user to choose?
A RAW histogram (it could even be logarithmic arranging the info in real EV divisions) of the 3 channels would allow at a glance to find out how well your RAW was exposed.

This is a perfectly exposed (but just because of a lucky shooter) RAW on an Oly camera, easy to see and clear to understand:

(http://www.guillermoluijk.com/article/histogram/rawhis.gif)

Also the DR of the scene is easily evaluated thanks to it, and hence you can quickly know the amount of noise you can expect in the shadows without even looking at the image, and find out how many extra shots are needed to capture all DR. Is it so difficult to add that to your cameras?

And the same would apply to the clipped blinking information, it should be possible to refer it to the RAW data.


AUTOMATIC ETTR MODE

With Live View cameras can evaluate the histogram of the scene in front of you in real time. Why don't use that valuable source of information to set up a mode for automatic ETTR? the camera would calculate exposure (aperture/shutter/ISO) to obtain a properly ETTR RAW file. A user setting could be % of blown pixels allowed in the RAW data.

If the Live View histogram is not precise enough (maybe it is calculated from an auxiliar sensor), why don't make then a quick preview shot (it can be very high ISO, no problem, and it _must_ be underexposed in order not to clip any channel), it could even be transparent to the user. With that information, the corrected exposure values can be calculated in a fraction of second to achieve the perfect ETTR in the real shot right afterwards.

I know Sony cameras can simulate the histograms you would get after you shot; if you move the exposure wheel histograms change in front of your eyes. Why don't use that in a real time exposure calculation?

I did it on my software and it's trivial to calculate the needed exposure correction to automatically achieve ETTR on a given set of data:

(http://www.guillermoluijk.com/tutorial/zeronoise/ettr.gif)


Someone would sign for this wish list or add new ideas?

BR
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: douglasf13 on March 25, 2009, 01:04:05 pm
I couldn't agree more.  Bring on the RAW histograms!
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: JBerardi on March 25, 2009, 01:46:30 pm
Right? For all the gnashing of teeth over tiny differences in top-end DSLR image quality, huge deficiencies such as the lack of RAW-based histograms go almost completely unnoticed. It's kind of like buying a Porsche and finding out they didn't bother to put a tachometer on the dash.
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: Hoang on March 25, 2009, 02:50:40 pm
I wouldn't hold my breath. Manufacturers seem to be more interested in features that attract attention, but ignore those that would actually be useful.
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: Vivec on March 25, 2009, 06:27:26 pm
Both would be great features -- I have been wondering about this from the day I started using raw. The histogram would be really easy. The ETTR exposure may prove harder in practice but could be done in theory for sure, especially with a widely spaced grid of light meters (like in most modern DSLR's).
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: douglasf13 on March 25, 2009, 06:53:05 pm
Quote from: JBerardi
Right? For all the gnashing of teeth over tiny differences in top-end DSLR image quality, huge deficiencies such as the lack of RAW-based histograms go almost completely unnoticed. It's kind of like buying a Porsche and finding out they didn't bother to put a tachometer on the dash.

  Yeah, no kidding.  As an A900 user, I always crack up when fellow A900 users comment on how good/bad their camera is compared to others, and then underexpose and use ACR to convert.  Too many drunk drivers
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: Guillermo Luijk on March 25, 2009, 08:03:50 pm
Quote from: Vivec
The ETTR exposure may prove harder in practice but could be done in theory for sure, especially with a widely spaced grid of light meters (like in most modern DSLR's).
I don't think multipoint light metering would be the way. After all you have 20 million light meters in your sensor! Why not perform a super-quick underexposed shot at high ISO prior to the real shot, analysing the RAW file obtained in that preliminary shot, and then adjust exposure settings to obtain the perfect ETTR in the final shot? even some intelligence could be applied in the algorithm, such as spatial clipped pattern recognition (e.g. the circle of the sun or artificial lamps on indoor and night shooting, specular reflections,...).

In fact the Sony A900 performs histogram simulation. You can move the exposure wheel after a quick shot and find out how the histogram would have been with any arbitrary exposure setting. You just need that to be done automatically in-camera to have an ETTR mode.
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: Daniel Browning on March 25, 2009, 09:05:37 pm
Quote from: GLuijk
If many users shoot RAW, why after 4 years of DSLR we are still looking at JPEG histograms and clipped info?

Because they don't care. Photography is not important to the corporate giants. All they care about is making money. Their market research must be telling them that they can make more money by not implementing these highly valuable features, despite how easy they would be to complete.

Perhaps informed photographers are so few and far between that only a very tiny minority of people realize the void left by these missing features. Perhaps our lamentations don't even make a blip on their radar. I would like to think their market research is flawed, but either way the answer is because they don't know or don't care.

What would it be like if there was a manufacturer who actually *did* listen to raw photographers? Where lowly "customers" can talk directly to the billionaire owner and the rest of the employees? And implemented their requests for raw histograms, eradication of variable pattern noise, ISO-as-metadata, black bias, no color matrix, etc.?

That would be RED Digital Cinema. The camera costs a cool $20K, but they implemented all the features that we've been begging for. On their first try. Canikon has had almost a decade and still hasn't bothered to implement these simple requests. RED even has a false color mode that shows the raw exposure level of everything in the scene (like the infrared sight of "Predator" as in "Predator-vs-Aliens").

I'll keep dreaming that some day one of the manufacturers will bother with features that are vital to my photography. In the mean time, I'll keep using the tiresome workarounds (uniWB, -5 EC instead of ISO 25600, etc.).
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: cmi on March 26, 2009, 07:47:35 am
Sometimes all it takes is having the idea. Representatives of the various companies are reading here I would guess, and I wouldnt be too surprised if someone just implements it. Seriously.

On a second throught: How would one go about implementing it? For me it appears as an option wich would correct exposure time, aperture or iso - depending on wich shooting mode I am in. (E.g. in aperture mode it corrects the time, in time mode it works on aperture.) This would be all under the hood, just an on/off switch or menu item wich works shooting-mode dependent.

Or in other words, it would be just another metering option. (ETTR metering.)


Regards

Christian
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: thierrylegros396 on March 26, 2009, 09:30:31 am
Quote from: Hoang
I wouldn't hold my breath. Manufacturers seem to be more interested in features that attract attention, but ignore those that would actually be useful.

On the G10 for example, they prefer to add "my sound" menu and other "non necessary" things  
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: thierrylegros396 on March 26, 2009, 09:33:34 am
Quote from: GLuijk
A user setting could be % of blown pixels allowed in the RAW data.

Exactly what I thought yesterday      

YES, RAW histograms are necessary !!!

Thierry
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: NikoJorj on March 26, 2009, 10:08:55 am
Quote from: cmi
Sometimes all it takes is having the idea.
Then, manufacturers really do need some imagination, or better said they need to put some drug controls in their factories to have their ingeneers design useful features instead of overcharging the main dials with funky "cat whiskers priority" modes...  
RAW-based histograms and ETTR and talked about regularly since at least 2003.   (The LL article (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/expose-right.shtml) that put the spots on the subject is of 2003, and here is a random example of 2007 (http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2007/11/why-no-expose-t.html)).
I just can't but second Guillermo's request, of course, with a few caveats.

As with last-millenia 18%-based matrix exposure, any automated exposure is prone to errors, and in the present case knowing the limit between what not to blow (important texture) and what to blow
(sun or light sources, specular reflections...) is not that easy for a machine - it's just an artistic choice in some cases.

The ability to choose the percentage of blown pixels would then come quite handy, and it would then be very useful to display a broader histogram, showing what stands in the blown area (at least 1 or 2EC past saturation), to give a hint on the eventual -EC needed.
Another solution would be not to allow anything to blow, but having at hand a greater amount of +EC (for the case where the sun is in the frame) - not as practical, I'd think.

For this specular reflection problem, it might also be interesting to keep those oldthink matrix meters, because they effectively offset little specular reflections (at the expense of accuracy) - and besides that, they don't need the shortcomings of live view mode.
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: cmi on March 26, 2009, 11:22:08 am
Quote from: NikoJorj
... ETTR ... talked about regularly since at least 2003. ...

Ok thats a different story, one indeed would think that the engineers catched up the idea since then!
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: Panopeeper on March 26, 2009, 11:47:06 am
I would leap for joy if my camera had only half of it: showing the raw histogram before shooting, so that I can save the multiple exposures. If one thinks about live view, one sees that this should not be difficult at all; even more, it would be easy to "predict" the clipping and indicate it with flashing, based on the selected ISO and exposure.

I don't think manufacturers see this as an important point, and probably they are right. I have been spreading the idea and the technique of ETTR on several forums, repeatedly for newcomers. My experience is, that people are excited about it first, but only very few are actually doing it. Of course, one could say more photogs would be using it if it was much simpler, but I am not sure.

The other side of it is the amount of complaint the manufacturers could expect by the masses of people, who would not understand what they are doing and why the raw histogram shows everything in scope, while the preview is horrendeously clipped, etc.
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: terence_patrick on March 26, 2009, 12:38:58 pm
I ETTR myself, but just to play devil's advocate, ask yourself how many people with DSLRs out there in the world even know what that concept means? Now imagine you're Canon or Nikon and try from a business standpoint to explain to the millions of people who've purchased your supposedly top-shelf camera that your metering has been wrong this entire time and now you should do it a new way and overexpose by X-amount. Or heck, what about those people who still shoot JPG? I imagine there are more people in the world who shoot JPG on a DSLR than those who shoot RAW.

It's kind of like when film was around and everyone knew that Portra 160nc could be shot at 80iso to open up the shadows. Or that Tri-X 400 could be exposed at 200. The ETTR concept has been around for a pretty long time, but I don't think that camera manufacturers should be changing things now.
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: Dale_Cotton2 on March 26, 2009, 12:53:08 pm
Quote from: Panopeeper
The other side of it is the amount of complaint the manufacturers could expect by the masses of people, who would not understand what they are doing and why the raw histogram shows everything in scope, while the preview is horrendeously clipped, etc.
To eliminate quite a bit of this problem all that would be needed is to hide or disable the options for ETTR metering and raw histograms based on whether the camera is in raw mode or not. So the standard matrix metering position on the dial would do ETTR if both the camera is set for raw output AND the appropriate custom function is enabled.

Terence Patrick wrote:
Quote
ask yourself how many people with DSLRs out there in the world even know what that concept [ETTR] means?
If ETTR metering were called highlight protection that might make it a bit more comprehensible to more photographers. The manual would then explain that having highlight protection enabled in high contrast light will likely result in images that appear too dark overall, and therefore would require post processing (this for JPEG shooters). And that of course leads to the idea of having the camera automatically modify the tone curve to open the shadows or of having this as one of those post-exposure JPEG adjustment menu options, like sepia toning or Velvia saturation.

Since camera marketing is highly competitive, and manufacturers are always on the look-out for new features to add to the laundry list for a given camera, both highlight protection metering and raw histograms would actually benefit whichever company got them out first. All that's needed to make this a plus instead of a minus is to use accessible terminology.
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: Panopeeper on March 26, 2009, 01:49:14 pm
Quote from: Dale_Cotton2
If ETTR metering were called highlight protection that might make it a bit more comprehensible to more photographers
That would be sad, as ETTR is just the opposite of highlight protection: it is shadow protection. Canon had a good reason to name "highlight tone priority" a function, which underexposes the shot by one stop.
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: Dale_Cotton2 on March 26, 2009, 03:39:26 pm
Quote from: Panopeeper
That would be sad, as ETTR is just the opposite of highlight protection: it is shadow protection. Canon had a good reason to name "highlight tone priority" a function, which underexposes the shot by one stop.
If the DR of the scene covers more range than the camera can record, and we expose so the brightest regions butt up against the right edge of the histogram, aren't the losses going to be in the shadows? That's what I had in mind, at any rate. But I don't care what the heck they call it as long as they do it. ;)
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: Panopeeper on March 26, 2009, 04:25:03 pm
Quote from: Dale_Cotton2
If the DR of the scene covers more range than the camera can record, and we expose so the brightest regions butt up against the right edge of the histogram, aren't the losses going to be in the shadows? That's what I had in mind, at any rate
This's not what ETTR is about; this is preventing clipping (one could say it is prudent exposure).

ETTR is about exposing higher than metering suggests, if this can be done without causing clipping. When creating in-camera JPEG, this method leads to overexposed result, even if actual clipping did not occur. The raw conversion with default parameters too looks like overexposed; normally one has to counter this with adjustments, for example by "Recovery" or by reducing the "Exposure" or "Brightness" in ACR. The goal of ETTR is to reduce the noise in the very dark regions.
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: Guillermo Luijk on March 26, 2009, 06:00:21 pm
I think a correct introduction of an ETTR mode would prevent any misunderstanding from users. It's clearly that camera vendors are not (yet) interested in this.

ETTR should be clearly introduced as:

- A mode only for RAW shooting since the concept itself (exposure correction required in postprocessing) doesn't make sense in JPEG.
- An advanced mode for users who know well what it means and what they want to achieve. It's a 'use at your own risk' philosophy.
- ETTR doesn't necessarily mean overexposing. I am in favour to consider it a method to prevent clipping with maximum exposure (I am not with Gabor here).
- ETTR shouldn't actually be an extra metering mode, but a new exposure calculation mode. So it could work in parallel to preexisting metering philosophies. For example ETTR + spot metering would mean you want to expose the metered point as much as possible right before clipping it. This spot doesn't need to be the most luminous point in the scene and this would be very useful to quickly choose which areas are to be ETTR'ed allowing any higher area to clip.

However for a precise calculation, it is a must here to have detailed light data gathered via Liveview or a preview shot. Just light metering wouldn't be precise enough.


Regarding the algorithm to use when evaluating the entire scene lightness, so that ETTR mode doesn't make wrong decisions ending in heavily underexposed shots because of the presence of high luminance elements (sun, lamps, speculars,...), I don't think it's difficult at all to detect shapes (continuous areas of adjacent pixels) in the scene with a high degree of light, several stops over any other part of the image, and ignore them for the calculation.

This can be easily seen in any histogram in the form or a high peak at saturation with a lot of empty levels right before:

(http://www.guillermoluijk.com/article/ettr/histlin.gif)

This is not the best example, but good enough to show that little peak on the right end preceeded by empty levels. That was a small specular reflection in the car made of connected pixels easy to identify and ignore for the ETTR exposure calculation:

(http://www.guillermoluijk.com/article/ettr/toyota.jpg)
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: Vivec on March 26, 2009, 06:14:19 pm
Quote from: GLuijk
I don't think multipoint light metering would be the way. After all you have 20 million light meters in your sensor! Why not perform a super-quick underexposed shot at high ISO prior to the real shot, analysing the RAW file obtained in that preliminary shot, and then adjust exposure settings to obtain the perfect ETTR in the final shot? even some intelligence could be applied in the algorithm, such as spatial clipped pattern recognition (e.g. the circle of the sun or artificial lamps on indoor and night shooting, specular reflections,...).

The problem here is of course that you need double mirror action in this case. Now, if your camera has Sony style liveview (as in the A300/A350) with an extra sensor, than it would suddenly be easy to do -- perhaps we'll see ETTR exposure mode after all  
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: Panopeeper on March 26, 2009, 06:17:18 pm
Quote from: GLuijk
ETTR doesn't necessarily mean overexposing. I am in favour to consider it a method to prevent clipping with maximum exposure
I don't think it is helpful to replace the existing terminology with something else. ETTR stays for ETTRight, which means "increase the exposure until reaching the right edge".

Avoiding clipping alone is not ETTR. It is - or should be - the everyday task of every photog, particularly relevant when creating JPEG in-camera.

Following is from Expose (to the) Right (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/expose-right.shtml):

The simple lesson to be learned from this is to bias your exposures so that the histogram is snugged up to the right, but not to the point that the highlights are blown. This can usually be seen by the flashing alert on most camera review screens. Just back off so that the flashing stops.

Now of course when you look at the RAW file in your favourite RAW processing software, like Camera RAW, the image will likely appear to be too light. That's OK. Just use the available sliders to change the brightness level and contrast so that the data is spread out appropriately and the image looks "right". This will accomplish a number of things. The first is that it will maximize the signal to noise ratio. The second is that it will minimize the posterization and noise that potentially occurs in the darker regions of the image.
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: Panopeeper on March 26, 2009, 06:18:59 pm
Sorry, I created a reply instead of updating the previous post. Isn't there a "Delete" funtion?
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: NikoJorj on March 27, 2009, 05:53:37 am
Quote from: GLuijk
- ETTR shouldn't actually be an extra metering mode, but a new exposure calculation mode. So it could work in parallel to preexisting metering philosophies. For example ETTR + spot metering would mean you want to expose the metered point as much as possible right before clipping it.
This implementation with the spot mode could be very useful indeed!

On the other hand, I don't see as well an ETTR calculation based on the center-weighted average.
But that's just why we pay some good money to camera makers, to elegantly resolve these kind of things - for the moment we're working in their place, unpaid!  

And about names, I think the "Expose to the Right" has been enough debated to keep its name, even if I'm also more on the "clipping protection" side.
This subject is debated from time to time on french forums and I'm bewildered about how many photographers just look at the middle tones as (beginners) in the old chemical days and don't pay any attention to clipping, and then complaining that their digital camera doesn't handle highlights well enough (this example (http://www.chassimages.com/forum/index.php/topic,34953.0.html), if you read french, is much less caricatural but still to the point : the debate started with an advanced amateur who associated ETTR with partial color clipping - hey guys ETTR is crap!   ).
It's fair to say that in France, good technical information is quite scarce, and as many frenchmen are really poor at any foreign language, that hinders them to seek the information where it is - namely on english-speaking resources like here.
Even within these restrictions, I think that such a feature would indeed make many people progress, allowing them to realize that 18% grey is a thing of the past regarding raw exposure metering.
Call me an optimistic if you want, but hoping for camera makers to release such a innovative thing is also optimism, isn't it?
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: cmi on March 27, 2009, 09:04:21 am
Quote from: NikoJorj
On the other hand, I don't see as well an ETTR calculation based on the center-weighted average.

Exactly. My thinking was, that with ETTR, you more or less have a fixed exposure, so appying ETTR on top of *every* metering mode would not make much sense - or I cant see it. But on the other hand, being optionally able to set the brightest point with spot-like metering (being able not to rely on the built-in algorithm) would be a very good thing too. I think it could boil down to a multi mode ETTR, fully automatic, maximum tolerable clipped area, and manual brightest point with spot metering. That said I still think it would be quite practical as a new metering mode. But I also dont want to start splitting hairs now since we are not the ones to decide such things anyway. It was just interesting for me to hear something more specific about possible implementations.

Regards


Christian


//edit: Maybe RICOH or Olympus or Phase One would implement such modes first... somehow I cant imagine seeing it on Canon for the next say 10 years or so.
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: Hening Bettermann on August 26, 2009, 07:42:14 pm
Quote from: GLuijk
Someone would sign for this wish list or add new ideas?

BR

YES, and YES.

And as for the new ideas, I have 2:

1-The camera should optionally make a second, "ZeroNoise", exposure in rapid succession to the main exposure, 1...4 EVs above ETTR, at my discretion. (Always using 4 EVs might increase exposure time too much, and even just 1 EV is of visible benefit)

2-the camera should allow me to automatically make exposures at different, manually pre-set focus points in rapid succession, for focus stacking

3- It should be possible to combine 1 and 2.

And if it is allowed to come with new ideas beyond exposure:

4- The camera should be a (full frame) EVIL camera, doing away with the cost, weight, bulk and shake of the mirror and its impact on lens design.

5-There should be a line of lenses with a max aperture of f/5.6 to save cost and WEIGHT.

Ooops, that was 5 instead of 2... :-)
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: wollom on August 27, 2009, 08:37:55 am
Quote from: Vivec
The problem here is of course that you need double mirror action in this case.

For many photographers 'one shot' involves taking many photographs. Right now we shoot-chimp-adjust until exposure etc look right then fire many frames at the same setting.  On Canon 1D cameras there are (I think) seven or eight exposure-related controls on the camera: control dials, AE lock, shooting mode, exposure bias, etc.  Being able to set one of these controls to make an ETTR pre-exposure when pressed would seem to be a 'simple' thing. And useful.

As a matter of interest the original 1Ds had a two stage hyperfocal point (depth of field) focusing aid. Not on the current versions.

Wollom
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: MarkL on August 27, 2009, 12:37:15 pm
Both RAW histograms and ETTR would be a sell point for me if the camera had it.

Others:

Auto ISO where it is possible to set it to 1/focal length (with + and - adjustability too)

Radio trigger that passes TTL info to remote flashes that is built into the body, no more IR line of sight with popup flash to trigger rubbish

DOF mode: focus on the near *push button* focus on far *push button* camera autofocuses on correct focus point and selects correct aperture for sufficient DOF. Camera also displays total DOF and near/far distances - circle of confusion can be changed by the user. Of course, they could just put depth of field markings and distance scales on all lenses again  

Camera analyses a high contrast scene and displays the scene brightness in stops, then shoots requisite frames in succession and performs raw file fusion done in camera a la the zero noise technique thread

Camera detects how much it has been moved on a tripod between frames and tags the data to the RAW file for use with stitching programs for perfect stitches (perhaps a little ambitious!)
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: Wayne Fox on August 28, 2009, 12:33:52 am
Quote from: MarkL
Both RAW histograms and ETTR would be a sell point for me if the camera had it.

Others:

Auto ISO where it is possible to set it to 1/focal length (with + and - adjustability too)

Radio trigger that passes TTL info to remote flashes built into the body, no more IR line of sight with popup flash rubbish

DOF mode: focus on the near *push button* focus on far *push button* camera autofocuses on correct focus point and selects correct aperture for sufficient DOF. Camera also displays total DOF and near/far distances - circle of confusion can be changed by the user. Of course, they could just put depth of field markings and distance scales on all lenses again  

Camera analyses a high contrast scene and displays the scene brightness in stops, then shoots requisite frames in succession and performs raw file fusion done in camera a la the zero noise technique thread

Camera detects how much it has been moved on a tripod between frames and tags the data to the RAW file for use with stitching programs for perfect stitches (perhaps a little ambitious!)


Interesting thread.  I'd love an EttR mode, especially one which rendered the preview and even the jpeg based on that.  Biggest thing on my wish list right now however is a 20mp+ dSLR without any AA filters ... I think the pixel density is sufficient that for many shooters they just won't have a moire problem.  I guess they'd have to make 2 versions since people photographers would still probably have issues.
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: Jonathan Wienke on August 30, 2009, 04:44:45 pm
I brought this idea up several years ago, and no manufacturer has implemented it yet. Good luck though...

http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....amp;#entry68727 (http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=11280&st=0&p=68727&hl=RAW%20histogram&#entry68727)
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: Chris Pollock on September 05, 2009, 09:05:53 am
The really annoying thing is that these features probably wouldn't even require any new hardware, just some software changes. They wouldn't cost any money once the software had been written. It might be a few weeks work for a competent programmer. The "Direct Print" button on the original 5D would have cost more money, and it was about as much use as an ashtray on a motorbike.

The reduced pixel count on the G11 gives me cause for hope. It shows that manufacturers do sometimes listen to what serious photographers want, eventually.
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: Guillermo Luijk on September 07, 2009, 03:30:00 pm

would it be a crazy idea to register some domain, something like: www.listentoyourcustomers.com expressing these ideas in a clear way, with the possibility for digital camera users of signing up? Something like that was done to improve the 5D2 video features I think.

BTW I wrote michael a PM about the possibility of an official article in the LL some weeks ago and had no response.

BR
Title: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: MarkL on September 07, 2009, 04:48:19 pm
Quote from: GLuijk
would it be a crazy idea to register some domain, something like: www.listentoyourcustomers.com expressing these ideas in a clear way, with the possibility for digital camera users of signing up? Something like that was done to improve the 5D2 video features I think.

BTW I wrote michael a PM about the possibility of an official article in the LL some weeks ago and had no response.

BR

I think development for projects like this will be the way to go: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/...90903163953.htm (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/09/090903163953.htm)

Fuji seem like the only innovative company left, I can't see canon or nikon etc. taking any notice given the history with mirror lockup
Title: Re: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: digitaldog on June 26, 2013, 09:28:44 am
That would be sad, as ETTR is just the opposite of highlight protection

In my mind, it's just ideal exposure. For raw. And yes, I'd love to see a histogram and meter that takes into account the kind of data we are capturing. ETTR is a term that should probably go away. It implies that this is some trick or adjustment when it's just optimally exposing data, in this case raw data, not a JPEG.
Title: Re: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: Tony Jay on June 26, 2013, 09:59:10 am
In my mind, it's just ideal exposure. For raw. And yes, I'd love to see a histogram and meter that takes into account the kind of data we are capturing. ETTR is a term that should probably go away. It implies that this is some trick or adjustment when it's just optimally exposing data, in this case raw data, not a JPEG.
Hallelujah!

Tony Jay
Title: Re: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: convexferret on June 26, 2013, 11:00:16 am
Those who enjoy using the Magic Lantern firmware have had RAW histograms (and auto-ettr mode) available for the last month or two. And they work very well indeed. They're available on the 5d3 and some other Canon SLRs.
Title: Re: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: digitaldog on June 26, 2013, 01:44:15 pm
Those who enjoy using the Magic Lantern firmware have had RAW histograms (and auto-ettr mode) available for the last month or two. And they work very well indeed. They're available on the 5d3 and some other Canon SLRs.

Very cool, just checked out the video's and the site. And the price is right! Considering downloading for my 5DMII but of course, one worries a bit about doing this. Any downside? They say thousands of people have used it without harm.
Title: Re: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: convexferret on June 27, 2013, 11:53:08 am
As far as I'm aware there have been no recent reports of problems. The firmware doesn't overwrite the Canon firmware, instead it gets loaded on each startup from the card and runs as a separate process in the camera CPU. I'm not sure if the release version has all of this but the most recent nightly builds do. I've been running the 5d3 dev version for months, updating almost daily without issues.
Title: Re: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: thierrylegros396 on June 27, 2013, 02:57:31 pm
As far as I'm aware there have been no recent reports of problems. The firmware doesn't overwrite the Canon firmware, instead it gets loaded on each startup from the card and runs as a separate process in the camera CPU. I'm not sure if the release version has all of this but the most recent nightly builds do. I've been running the 5d3 dev version for months, updating almost daily without issues.

Works like CHDK for compact cameras, but sadly RAW histogram is not available with CHDK ::) ::)
Title: Re: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: deanwork on June 28, 2013, 09:53:34 am
That is a great point that I've never head anyone say. Why are we using the term ETTR when what we are really discussing is Normal exposure for Raw?

It seems to me there should be some way to comletely decouple a jpeg workflow from a raw workflow in the camera software with raw histogram at the top of the list. They should have histograms for both.

At least in the higher end models I don't understand why they  haven't done this.


john



In my mind, it's just ideal exposure. For raw. And yes, I'd love to see a histogram and meter that takes into account the kind of data we are capturing. ETTR is a term that should probably go away. It implies that this is some trick or adjustment when it's just optimally exposing data, in this case raw data, not a JPEG.
Title: Re: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: michael on June 28, 2013, 10:23:31 am
Sad to say, but in conversations with both executives and engineers from Japanese as well as European camera makers, we've been suggesting this for years. Years and years well, at least 4-5 years.

The response is always, Humm, ya, that makes sense, but then nothing ever happens.

Why are they so pig headed? Hard to say. In reality, many of the executives simply don't have an in-depth enough grasp of the issue, and the engineers that do understand it take their marching orders from the executives who are unfamiliar with the need.

Another industry pundit and I spent an entire afternoon a couple of years ago with a senior product manager of a major camera maker who did get it, and who could have pushed it through on a new camera that is now on the market. But when asked why it didn't appear, the answer was a shrug that they had to prioritize their engineering, and that this didn't make the cut.

So, don't hold your breath.

Michael
Title: Re: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: thierrylegros396 on June 28, 2013, 11:05:46 am
Sad to say, but in conversations with both executives and engineers from Japanese as well as European camera makers, we've been suggesting this for years. Years and years well, at least 4-5 years.

The response is always, Humm, ya, that makes sense, but then nothing ever happens.

Why are they so pig headed? Hard to say. In reality, many of the executives simply don't have an in-depth enough grasp of the issue, and the engineers that do understand it take their marching orders from the executives who are unfamiliar with the need.

Another industry pundit and I spent an entire afternoon a couple of years ago with a senior product manager of a major camera maker who did get it, and who could have pushed it through on a new camera that is now on the market. But when asked why it didn't appear, the answer was a shrug that they had to prioritize their engineering, and that this didn't make the cut.

So, don't hold your breath.

Michael

But if one more "original" manufacturer (perhaps Sony or Fujifilm) put that feature to their best models, perhaps that the others will follow.

Canon will certainly be the last ;D ;D ;D

Note: I like a lot of Canon products, but certainly not the way they choose their engineering priority.

Have a Nice W-E.

Thierry
Title: Re: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: Isaac on June 28, 2013, 11:47:19 am
Why are they so pig headed? Hard to say.

Maybe not. Would this feature really be enough to sway someone's purchasing decision?

(If the choice was between otherwise identical cameras -- sure it would; but the choice is between cameras that already differ on other features.)
Title: Re: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: Jack Hogan on June 28, 2013, 04:11:48 pm
Maybe not. Would this feature really be enough to sway someone's purchasing decision?
I don't know about someone.  But if my camera maker were to come out with something like this I might upgrade sooner rather than later.  Right now it looks like later :-)
Title: Re: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: Isaac on June 28, 2013, 04:32:32 pm
Find another 10,000 people willing to prepay for the same camera model :-)
Title: Re: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: Jim Kasson on June 28, 2013, 05:16:09 pm
I don't know about someone.  But if my camera maker were to come out with something like this I might upgrade sooner rather than later.  Right now it looks like later :-)

What if the camera manufacturers sold firmware separately? They could ship the vanilla firmware with the camera. If you wanted some non-standard feature, you could pay for firmware with that feature. Maybe they could take a tip from Porsche, and charge you to take out features that clutter up the menu. I've got an NEX-7 with a ton of features that I'll never use that just get in the way.

Jim
Title: Re: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: Vladimirovich on June 28, 2013, 08:42:34 pm
Maybe not. Would this feature really be enough to sway someone's purchasing decision?
see what is with in camera DNG  ;D ... nobody cares (and DNG is wanted by much more people thant raw histogram)
Title: Re: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: Vladimirovich on June 28, 2013, 08:44:05 pm
you could pay for firmware with that feature.
so how much money you will spend for developers, QAs, tech writers, csr training, etc vs how much buyers will buy (@ what price ?)
Title: Re: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: jwstl on June 29, 2013, 02:50:11 am
see what is with in camera DNG  ;D ... nobody cares (and DNG is wanted by much more people thant raw histogram)

I would suspect a significant portion of Raw photographers aren't aware they aren't getting a Raw histogram. And if they were, it would be higher on their wish list as it is on mine. I can easily make DNGs in post processing so nothing is really lost as it is without a true histogram while shooting.
Title: Re: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: sharperstill on June 29, 2013, 04:07:07 am
Those who enjoy using the Magic Lantern firmware have had RAW histograms (and auto-ettr mode) available for the last month or two. And they work very well indeed. They're available on the 5d3 and some other Canon SLRs.

Mr Ferret, are you using the Alpha 2 version of Magic Lantern for the 5D III?
I wouldn't mind a walk through of setting up the RAW histogram and its use etc. installation of ML seems straightforward enough.

Jon
Title: Re: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: NikoJorj on July 04, 2013, 08:26:08 am
That is a great point that I've never head anyone say. Why are we using the term ETTR when what we are really discussing is Normal exposure for Raw?
Because the ETTR term coined by Michael and Thomas Knoll emphasizes the fact than instead of metering the gray value to set it on the middle of the film curve, one should meter the highlights to set them on the right of the digital tonal curve.
But yes, it is only the right exposure for raw, period.


Sad to say, but in conversations with both executives and engineers from Japanese as well as European camera makers, we've been suggesting this for years. Years and years well, at least 4-5 years.
We owe you many thanks for trying this, Michael!


so how much money you will spend for developers, QAs, tech writers, csr training, etc vs how much buyers will buy (@ what price ?)
Well, the case for DNG is more of a mixed one because it actually implies adding some code (even if it's much more trivial than, say, face recognition implemented in 100$ P&S).
Here, it's more a case of putting code to the side, and counting the beans before they are baked (that seems easier indeed, doesn't it?).
And yes, a raw histogram would be a significant incentive for me - and an ETTR mode a big one. 9999 to go.
Title: Re: 3rd Party Firmware voids warranty?
Post by: bjanes on July 04, 2013, 09:51:29 am
Mr Ferret, are you using the Alpha 2 version of Magic Lantern for the 5D III?
I wouldn't mind a walk through of setting up the RAW histogram and its use etc. installation of ML seems straightforward enough.

Jon

I would think that installing 3rd party firmware in one's camera would likely void the warranty on the camera and/or the lens. We already have reports of the computer chip in the new Zeiss 135/mm f/2 APO being fried in some D800s. Is this the result of faulty code in the Zeiss chip or in the camera firmware? Since there are no reports of Nikon lenses having this problem, the fault probably lies in the Zeiss code, but Zeiss could claim to the contrary. It is conceivable that faulty firmware could actually damage the camera.

Bill
Title: Re: 3rd Party Firmware voids warranty?
Post by: Jim Kasson on July 04, 2013, 11:53:29 am
I would think that installing ... It is conceivable that faulty firmware could actually damage the camera.

Bill,

It is indeed conceivable, but, as a former system designer who started out as a hardware designer, I'd never design the hardware that way, either the lens or the body. Even if you trust the software engineers -- and a lot of hardware designers don't -- you have to deal with situations like debugging. In addition, a good hardware designer designs against cascading failures, like a cpu failure causing a motor failure. Those safeguards also mitigate the effects of hardware failures.

We already have reports of the computer chip in the new Zeiss 135/mm f/2 APO being fried in some D800s. Is this the result of faulty code in the Zeiss chip or in the camera firmware? Since there are no reports of Nikon lenses having this problem, the fault probably lies in the Zeiss code, but Zeiss could claim to the contrary.

I don't think it's clear that the fault lies with anyone's code. We don't have enough information to know it's not all hardware.

My 135 APO is so far working fine. I'm hoping it stays that way.

Jim
Title: Re: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: ErikKaffehr on July 04, 2013, 12:19:56 pm
Hi,

My experience is that Sony's histograms and especially blinking highlights are quite accurate.

Best regards
Erik

Sad to say, but in conversations with both executives and engineers from Japanese as well as European camera makers, we've been suggesting this for years. Years and years well, at least 4-5 years.

The response is always, Humm, ya, that makes sense, but then nothing ever happens.

Why are they so pig headed? Hard to say. In reality, many of the executives simply don't have an in-depth enough grasp of the issue, and the engineers that do understand it take their marching orders from the executives who are unfamiliar with the need.

Another industry pundit and I spent an entire afternoon a couple of years ago with a senior product manager of a major camera maker who did get it, and who could have pushed it through on a new camera that is now on the market. But when asked why it didn't appear, the answer was a shrug that they had to prioritize their engineering, and that this didn't make the cut.

So, don't hold your breath.

Michael
Title: Re: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: Jack Hogan on July 04, 2013, 05:41:01 pm
But yes, it is only the right exposure for raw, period.

What other kind is there?  :)
Title: Re: 3rd Party Firmware voids warranty?
Post by: EduPerez on July 05, 2013, 03:25:09 am
I would think that installing 3rd party firmware in one's camera would likely void the warranty on the camera and/or the lens. We already have reports of the computer chip in the new Zeiss 135/mm f/2 APO being fried in some D800s. Is this the result of faulty code in the Zeiss chip or in the camera firmware? Since there are no reports of Nikon lenses having this problem, the fault probably lies in the Zeiss code, but Zeiss could claim to the contrary. It is conceivable that faulty firmware could actually damage the camera.

Bill

Well, ML does not technically install any firmware in the camera: ML gets loaded from the card when the camera boots, and works with the original firmware; but I agree that it could anyhow break the camera or the lens. However, from my personal experience (I am the current maintainer of a similar project), Canon cameras and lenses seems to be quite tolerant to "firmware abuse".
Title: Re: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: mac_paolo on July 06, 2013, 12:39:40 am
Hi,

My experience is that Sony's histograms and especially blinking highlights are quite accurate.

Best regards
Erik
My DSC-RX100 is far from being accurate in that regard. I pretty much always overexpose by 0.7 Ev, getting a blinky preview and still having a somewhat underexposed image when getting over to Lightroom.
My father has an A55V but honestly I don't recall how does it work when reporting burnt highlights. Definitely mine is not accurate at all.
Title: Re: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: Guillermo Luijk on July 06, 2013, 06:05:05 am
Sad to say, but in conversations with both executives and engineers from Japanese as well as European camera makers, we've been suggesting this for years. Years and years well, at least 4-5 years.

That was right the time when this thread was created. You could even have illustrated them with the real RAW histograms presented at your forum! :)
Title: Re: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: ErikKaffehr on July 13, 2013, 10:52:19 am
Hi,

Lightroom does some dirty tricks to images. Have you tried to open the images that show the true image like RawDigerr?

Best regards
Erik

My DSC-RX100 is far from being accurate in that regard. I pretty much always overexpose by 0.7 Ev, getting a blinky preview and still having a somewhat underexposed image when getting over to Lightroom.
My father has an A55V but honestly I don't recall how does it work when reporting burnt highlights. Definitely mine is not accurate at all.
Title: Re: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: convexferret on July 14, 2013, 10:45:28 am
Mr Ferret, are you using the Alpha 2 version of Magic Lantern for the 5D III?
I wouldn't mind a walk through of setting up the RAW histogram and its use etc. installation of ML seems straightforward enough.

Jon
    I've been using the latest nightly builds. Note, these aren't the official nightly builds as the 5D III and a few other cameras are not yet part of the official distribution but rather there's a thread in the ML forums that contains links to regular builds for the 5D IIi, 50D and some other cameras. I've found them 100% reliable and as mentioned elsewhere, you're not overwriting anything and so removing the battery will leave you back as you were.

    Setup after installation is pressing the trash button to bring up the ML menus, third menu along, SET to turn on the histogram and Q to enter the histogram sub-menu. Switch on the RAW histogram and you're good to go. The RAW histogram is displayed in live mode and when reviewing the image just taken. It will not appear if you go back to look at images later as it uses the data in the current buffer.

    Lastly there is one issue and that is that ML for the 5D III has does not yet support the latest Canon firmware released a couple of months ago. I don't find that a problem.
Title: Re: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: digitaldog on July 14, 2013, 12:20:47 pm
Lightroom does some dirty tricks to images.

Such as?

If one were to be using LR, with such dirty tricks to process their images, isn't that part of the Exposure + Development process and unless one is using differing raw converters (which would alter this relationship), does it matter? If lab A runs their E6 line minus stop compared to lab B, and you've tested exposure and development at lab A, does it matter what lab B is doing? Yes if you ran film at both labs (something I'd never do in the old days unless someone, a client but a gun to my head). I'm actually interested in what dirty tricks are done but considering I process nearly all my raws in this product and I understand this part of the equation, I'm as yet not seeing this as a problem. Might be a trick, I'll agree. Is it dirty and is this unique among the other raw converters? Even if we had a true and accurate raw histogram on the camera, would we not still need to understand how each converter affected this data?
Title: Re: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: mac_paolo on July 16, 2013, 01:58:39 am
Hi,

Lightroom does some dirty tricks to images. Have you tried to open the images that show the true image like RawDigerr?

Best regards
Erik
I did. A standard exposure straight OOC is always a somewhat underexposed. +0.7 Ev is my default value. Obviously, since I like bright (not burnt) images, tastes may vary.
Title: Re: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: Bart_van_der_Wolf on July 16, 2013, 08:08:16 am
Is it dirty and is this unique among the other raw converters? Even if we had a true and accurate raw histogram on the camera, would we not still need to understand how each converter affected this data?

Hi Andrew,

I would not necessarily call it dirty, but LR does differ in it's approach to Raw conversion compared to other Rawconverters. Besides matters like profiling, it has a very different approach towards the handling of exposure corrections and how that impacts highlight rendering.

There is fortunately a way to create less compressed highlights by pulling considerably (even to -100) back on the highlights slider, but some might consider that a (dirty) trick which is not necessary in other converters. Without that, white clouds and other highlight information looks dull and lifeless compared to other converter defaults.

Of course one can create a default for that, but to adjust the default behavior may also be called a trick.

Cheers,
Bart
Title: Re: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: ErikKaffehr on July 16, 2013, 08:22:42 am
Hi,

Sorry, what I meant is that Lightroom seems to do highlight recovery without user intervention, so an image with clipped highlights may show up without any indication of clipping but it would be clipped in a true raw histogram.

I actually like this behaviour but it could be a good thing if got a warning that we have highlight recovery.

Best regards
Erik


Such as?

Title: Re: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: bwana on July 16, 2013, 02:06:47 pm
Eric

Can you not go back to the previous process version 2010 to get rid of that 'automatic' highlight adjusting? You'll definitely see more clipping that wasnt there in the 2012 version. Also, I found that if i go from a corrected photo in 2012 to 2010 and then switch back to 2012, the photo requires repeat correction.
Title: Re: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: ErikKaffehr on July 17, 2013, 04:11:03 am
Hi,

Yes, PV2010 shows clipping, but I think the 2012 pipeline is much better. But I feel I cannot judge exposure based on PV2012, so I do frequent excursions into RawDigger that shows the actual raw image.

Best regards
Erik


Eric

Can you not go back to the previous process version 2010 to get rid of that 'automatic' highlight adjusting? You'll definitely see more clipping that wasnt there in the 2012 version. Also, I found that if i go from a corrected photo in 2012 to 2010 and then switch back to 2012, the photo requires repeat correction.
Title: Re: Camera manufacturers PLEASE: when RAW histograms and an ETTR mode?
Post by: sharperstill on July 17, 2013, 05:28:58 am
Jon
    I've been using the latest nightly builds. Note, these aren't the official nightly builds as the 5D III and a few other cameras are not yet part of the official distribution but rather there's a thread in the ML forums that contains links to regular builds for the 5D IIi, 50D and some other cameras. I've found them 100% reliable and as mentioned elsewhere, you're not overwriting anything and so removing the battery will leave you back as you were.

    Setup after installation is pressing the trash button to bring up the ML menus, third menu along, SET to turn on the histogram and Q to enter the histogram sub-menu. Switch on the RAW histogram and you're good to go. The RAW histogram is displayed in live mode and when reviewing the image just taken. It will not appear if you go back to look at images later as it uses the data in the current buffer.

    Lastly there is one issue and that is that ML for the 5D III has does not yet support the latest Canon firmware released a couple of months ago. I don't find that a problem.
Thanks for the response. I'll try it out...

Jon