1DS Mk III--Highlight Tone Priority

[Dave Gurtcheff]

  Hi all:
I just got a 1DS Mk III. I specialize in shooting seascapes, where there are expanses of white sand and (sometimes) big white puffy clouds. I can see the value of this feature for wedding photographers, but has anyone used it for landscape/seascape shooting?
Thanks in advance
Dave G
www.modernpictorials.com

[Josh-H]

  Hi all:
I just got a 1DS Mk III. I specialize in shooting seascapes, where there are expanses of white sand and (sometimes) big white puffy clouds. I can see the value of this feature for wedding photographers, but has anyone used it for landscape/seascape shooting?
Thanks in advance
Dave G
www.modernpictorials.com
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=175330\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I am still experimenting with this new feature on landscapes.

What I have found however is that I am usually at ISO 100 or 50 and already using 2-3 stops of ND - especially for sea shots. So having to go to ISO200 to use HTP is not really all that convenient.

Having said that... there are some online comparisons with this feature on and off and it definately does offer advantages [viewable] in static tests.

How useful that is in the field.. well I am still in the test stages....

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

This has been debated ad nauseam here and on other forums and the consensus is (oh, boy, am i going to get in trouble for daring to state there is a consensus  ) that there is a visible advantage only if you shoot JPEGs. In RAW, the Highlight Tone Protection setting has no effect other than underexposing by one stop.

[Dave Gurtcheff]

This has been debated ad nauseam here and on other forums and the consensus is (oh, boy, am i going to get in trouble for daring to state there is a consensus  ) that there is a visible advantage only if you shoot JPEGs. In RAW, the Highlight Tone Protection setting has no effect other than underexposing by one stop.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=175341\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I shoot RAW, so there probably would be no advantage for me.
Thanks to both of you.
Dave

[dwdallam]

I shoot RAW, so there probably would be no advantage for me.
Thanks to both of you.
Dave
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=175460\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Would not the advantage be that if you increase your exposure you won't blow out the highlights? I think that would be a huge advantage when bracketing. For instance, you would not have to worry about when you reached that threshold. You would simply crank the exposure comp and shoot, wash and repeat. If I understand correctly, using this will not allow you to blow highlights. If so, very usefull really.

[Guillermo Luijk]

I shoot RAW, so there probably would be no advantage for me.

If you shoot RAW, you can switch the word 'probably' by 'by certain'.
HTP is absolutely useless in RAW, it simply shoots the scene with the Av/Tv parameters set, but with the ISO one stop lower than set.

Shooting at ISO200+HTP produces the same RAW file as shooting ISO100 without HTP but the same aperture/shutter parameters. So there is nothing you can get using HTP that you cannot get without making use of it in RAW.

So if you calculated the right exposure parameters, you will get 1 f-stop underexposure because of HTP, i.e. empty histogram in the end, worse signal to noise ratio, and less captured dynamic range.
As you can see it's a very advanced feature... to make your RAW files worse hehe.

HTP is only useful when shooting JPEG where camera processing will take care of a correct exposure in the middle range of the scene, but preserving 1 extra f-stop in the highlights. Good for high DR scenes shot in JPEG.

[203]

I shoot RAW only and I have found the Highlight Prio setting to be very helpful. It produces highlights with more detail and which are less likely to blow channels, with a bit more noise in the shadows. I am usually a lot more concerned with blown highlights than with noise in the shadows which most likely will not show in prints anyway. Highlight Prio and DPP produce superb conversions when in high dynamic range situations. Try it for yourself.

[Panopeeper]

I shoot RAW only and I have found the Highlight Prio setting to be very helpful

Are you using DPP?

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

I shoot RAW only and I have found the Highlight Prio setting to be very helpful. It produces highlights with more detail and which are less likely to blow channels, with a bit more noise in the shadows...

Exactly the same can be achieved by underexposing by one stop, when needed.

The belief in the HTP RAW "virtues" is actually dangerous: it makes people keep HTP on all the time.  "And why not...", they would (wrongly) argue, "...who would not want a better dynamic range?". However, by keeping it on all the time, they are underexposing every shot they take, even those not in danger of highlights being blown. Instead of "exposing to the right" they are consistently doing the opposite: exposing to the left.

[csp]

Exactly the same can be achieved by underexposing by one stop, when needed.

The belief in the HTP RAW "virtues" is actually dangerous: it makes people keep HTP on all the time.  "And why not...", they would (wrongly) argue, "...who would not want a better dynamic range?". However, by keeping it on all the time, they are underexposing every shot they take, even those not in danger of highlights being blown. Instead of "exposing to the right" they are consistently doing the opposite: exposing to the left.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=175726\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

what BS  HTP works and it is not just a simple underexposure. do you actually use a mk3 ?

[John Sheehy]

what BS  HTP works and it is not just a simple underexposure. do you actually use a mk3 ?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=175762\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes, it is just an under-exposure.  The RAW images are the same (or as same as any two can be, with random noise and all) with -1 EC and ISO 100, vs 0 EC and ISO 200 w/HTP.

Now if they could use live view to determine exposure that is just short of clipping the RAW data, that would be truly useful for a better version of "HTP".

They'll save that for the next upgrade, though.  They certainly don't want to sell you a camera that you'll be content with for years.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

...what BS HTP works...

Ah, what a simple argument, yet so eloquent and powerful! I am a convert now.

...do you actually use a mk3 ?

No, but I try to use elementary logic... (and 40D, which shares the very same feature with Mark III).

[Guillermo Luijk]

I shoot RAW only and I have found the Highlight Prio setting to be very helpful. It produces highlights with more detail and which are less likely to blow channels, with a bit more noise in the shadows. I am usually a lot more concerned with blown highlights than with noise in the shadows which most likely will not show in prints anyway. Highlight Prio and DPP produce superb conversions when in high dynamic range situations. Try it for yourself.

The highlights with HTP are exactly the same as going down 1 f-stop in ISO keeping aperure and speed, and so are the shadows.
If you find any benefit in HTP is not because of the HTP itself but for the specifical processing your Canon RAW developer is doing, which could be applied on any RAW file like any other software processing around.

Find here: CANON'S HTP DOESN'T ADD ANYTHING IN RAW (Spanish) a comparaision between the 2 RAW files produced in the following conditions:

1. ISO200 with HTP ON
2. ISO100 with HTP OFF

keeping the same aperture/shutter speed in both cases. The RAWs produced are simply the same, just look at the images. In fact in that test, the user got the whole final f-stop completely empty because of using HTP, so he obtained a noisier image with less dynamic range for nothing.

[203]

In my experience, where HTP becomes useful is when, using DPP,  you need better highlight retention and do not want to spend time tinkering with curves after the fact. The curve applied by DPP to the underexposed files actually works pretty well, IMO.

[dwdallam]

These are the type of options I think are pretty useless, especially when there are other needed options.

[Josh-H]

These are the type of options I think are pretty useless, especially when there are other needed options.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=176073\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I wouldnt define it as useless.

Yes, there are features I would rather have - such as mirror lock-up on one button! But.. HTP is still useful for jpeg shooters. Im glad its there on the camera even if I dont use it 99.99% of the time.

[John Sheehy]

In my experience, where HTP becomes useful is when, using DPP,  you need better highlight retention and do not want to spend time tinkering with curves after the fact. The curve applied by DPP to the underexposed files actually works pretty well, IMO.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=176033\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The curve only needs to pull down highlights to serve its function but the read noise floor is still a stop higher, and there's nothing any curve can do to change that, except blackening shadows.

[dwdallam]

Why couldn't it simply back off on exposure by a user preset amount, or have the option to either back off X increments or until all highlights are not clipped, instead of ONE fstop? That would have been more useful, imo.

It's kind of a dumb option, meaning it's not tech smart.

[Panopeeper]

Why couldn't it simply back off on exposure by a user preset amount

Does not your camera has an exposure bias control? Canon cameras do have that. So, if a user wants to back off a certain amount, it can do that by exposure biasing. I guess you too can do that by manual control.

or have the option to either back off X increments or until all highlights are not clipped, instead of ONE fstop? That would have been more useful, imo.

Great idea. The camera only needs to make a serie of shots to determine the optimal exposure.

Luckily, Canon cameras an option very like to this one. It is called exposure bracketing.

It's kind of a dumb option, meaning it's not tech smart

It is a useless option for raw shooters, but it can be useful with JPEG.