Shooting Raw - Histograms & ETTR

[Jack Hogan]

BTW the RAW histogram + Auto ETTR story seems a lost battle. ETTR will loose all interest before camera makers decide to look at it:

Looks like Nikon is going to be providing an in-camera RAW histogram by the end of this month via a firmware update to its recent DSLRs.  I had to pinch myself and double check the date (not April 1st, phew)  to make sure I was not dreaming.

[Guillermo Luijk]

Looks like Nikon is going to be providing an in-camera RAW histogram by the end of this month via a firmware update to its recent DSLRs.  I had to pinch myself and double check the date (not April 1st, phew)  to make sure I was not dreaming.

That would be really great news, if one make includes RAW histograms others will follow. I wonder if it will be a log (EV stops) or gamma lifted histogram.

Regards

[deejjjaaaa]

I wonder if it will be a log (EV stops) or gamma lifted histogram.

"...will announce a new “I AM Advancing” program for Nikon DSLR..." - subscription based, $10/mo, stop paying fees and access to camera's menu blocked 

[dwswager]

"...will announce a new “I AM Advancing” program for Nikon DSLR..." - subscription based, $10/mo, stop paying fees and access to camera's menu blocked 

I couldn't find this in any of the links I checked.  Most just say that the downloader is free and that you can get firmware updates for 3 years.

[deejjjaaaa]

I couldn't find this in any of the links I checked.  Most just say that the downloader is free and that you can get firmware updates for 3 years.

it was a joke... however subscription model shall find its way eventually, why is it that Adobe needs it and Nikon doesn't ?

[dwswager]

it was a joke... however subscription model shall find its way eventually, why is it that Adobe needs it and Nikon doesn't ?

Don't blame Adobe.  Blame the customers that support it.  As for me, I'm still on Photoshop CS6.

[digitaldog]

Don't blame Adobe.  Blame the customers that support it. 

And don't blame the customers who are quite happy to pay for the product. Seems like many are quite happy to do so.

[Guillermo Luijk]

Don't blame Adobe.  Blame the customers that support it.  As for me, I'm still on Photoshop CS6.

I beat you, mine is CS2

[fdisilvestro]

I wonder if it will be a log (EV stops) or gamma lifted histogram.

Regards

I would prefer a log (EV stops) histogram, but since this is still a rumor and we are allowed to dream, what about a custom function that lets you decide between the two options?

[mouse]

Don't blame Adobe.  Blame the customers that support it.  As for me, I'm still on Photoshop CS6.

I don't feel the need to blame anyone.  I too am still using CS6, but don't doubt that eventually Adobe will offer some very significant(can't do without) improvement that will force me to the cloud.  Thus far, not tempted.

As for camera makers, it's an interesting (and frightening) idea that, in future they may offer cameras whose feature set is intentionally missing desirable refinements.  They could then offer subscription firmware updates to add features.  It would provide a revenue stream from owners who cannot justify the cost of moving up to the next generation camera, but who would gladly pay a fraction of that cost to upgrade their current camera.

[deejjjaaaa]

They could then offer subscription firmware updates to add features.  

nope, subscription to keep your camera running - much better... pay or face a brick.

[dwswager]

I don't feel the need to blame anyone.  I too am still using CS6, but don't doubt that eventually Adobe will offer some very significant(can't do without) improvement that will force me to the cloud.  Thus far, not tempted.

As for camera makers, it's an interesting (and frightening) idea that, in future they may offer cameras whose feature set is intentionally missing desirable refinements.  They could then offer subscription firmware updates to add features.  It would provide a revenue stream from owners who cannot justify the cost of moving up to the next generation camera, but who would gladly pay a fraction of that cost to upgrade their current camera.

I won't go so far as to say intentionally missing features, but since I think, with appropriate processing capability and onboard power, that software would be the logical area for improvement, that they could charge for upgrades.  Of course, people will be 'rooting' their cameras to put 3rd party apps on them.

[dwswager]

And don't blame the customers who are quite happy to pay for the product. Seems like many are quite happy to do so.

I agree that lots of customers are happy to pay a monthly subscription fee.  But it is equally true that the blame that subscription based software is with us is because of sentence number 1. 

As for me, I paid for Photoshop and the upgrades and was happy to do so, but when subscription 1st came out adobe wanted $29 a month while my upgrade from CS5 to CS6 was $175.  Subscription based is more expensive and always will be.  It is the whole reason that 5 and 6 year car loans are very popular.  Get the individuals payments low enough and people will 1) overpay for stuff, and 2) buy stuff they really can't afford.  Reminds of the whole extended warranty scam.

[digitaldog]

Something new?

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/8189925268/what-s-that-noise-shedding-some-light-on-the-sources-of-noise?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=generic

[bjanes]

Something new?

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/8189925268/what-s-that-noise-shedding-some-light-on-the-sources-of-noise?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=generic

That is a nice article, but Emil Martinec's post is still the best source of which I am aware on this topic. The current article is less technical and may be more easily comprehended by those who are less technically oriented.

Bill

[Guillermo Luijk]

Emil's article is the Bible of digital camera noise!