October 01, 2014, 08:39:02 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - ishdakuteb

Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 25
196
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III Dynamic Range
« on: February 09, 2013, 08:03:36 PM »
Folks,
Greetings,
As we all know the dynamic range of 5D MK III is not better than its counterpart Nikon D800. I was wondering if this deficiency could be addressed by using single shot HDR for batch processing. Has anyone tried HDR batch process to improve dynamic range, what would be good software for this purpose or any other comments. Thanks in advance.
Raj
:)

Dynamic range is the result of the highlight saturation ceiling and the noise floor. You can't use software to improve it because you can't create data that doesn't exist in the first place.

Canon cameras have a significant noise floor in the shadows, due to the way the sensor data is read that adds noise to it. Sony/Nikon's method of reading the sensor is inherently less noisy so they have more dynamic range.

Canon improved the 5D3 dynamic range by about a stop from the previous generation, and you don't really need more DR unless you're doing architecture or landscape, in which case you can use multi shot.

not true, if you know to handle the DR= show the reproduction from high lights to the lowest levels in a motive, 14 stops DR are more than 11 with banding and pattern noise including in the 11 stop of DR

show me your best of best image that you have ever taken so that i am going to open my eyes mr. self promoted president/artist...  once again, we all know what is all that about, you do not have to keep talking about the same for year(s) and we all know how to work around with it.  well, i guess no matter what you will keep saying the same since i guess that nikon probably hire you to be here and flood with same information, so PATHETIC...

197
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III Dynamic Range
« on: February 09, 2013, 07:32:21 PM »
PBD: I called Mikael an irrelevance, which by my understanding of the word is not an insult, because his comments in these threads are so often irrelevant.

IMO, you are directly disrespecting the man with that statement.
You seem to have an adequate grasp of english to be able to understand that you did not refer to his IDEAS with that comment, which you've repeated more than once.

If you were to do so, you'd have said, "Hey, your opinion or comment is irrelevant."
FWIW, irrelevance is not even a real word, but you're putting it into a context that comes across as disrespectful.
I also find your badgering of people for their raw files a put-off as well.
What do you hope to accomplish from someone else's raw files?
If you want samples of D800 or 5d2 files, you can find them, shot under very controlled conditions, on various sites.  Imaging-resourse is a good example.
Download them and play with them.  See how they compare for yourself.
I see little need to duplicate their efforts to appease such requests.

PSD calls only one irrelevant but i think should be both of you

Quote
PBD: Can you show us some images where the DR of the Canon just can't work but the slightly higher DR of the Nikon saved the day and made a worthwhile image? It appears not.

yes.
I can show you where, if I had shot Nikon, it would have provided an image that _I_ would have liked much better.  My client didn't care.  I'm a much fussier customer than my clients.

your clients are blind.  compare the two below.  the first one, which is yours, is what i am calling snapshot.  if it is mine, i send it to trash can right away



and this one, the second one we are calling art



and another two, ditto, first one is a snapshot.  not necessary an image composed with diagonal line is art



and second one is art



Quote
PBD: However, what we are constantly asking for is examples of where the Canon equipment lets you down in real world shooting,

Right, and when I actually started a thread on this exact topic a couple days ago I got 2 pages of crap from various fan-boys on this site who weren't patient enough for some examples to be posted by me or anyone else.  Very few others even braved the flames to actually try to participate.  I feel bad for them because they were interested in the topic but were likely turned off by the resulting brawl.  I certainly was.
Why should I, and some others, waste our time trying to share our experience and knowledge when the response is ridicule or disrespect?  Many of the people on this forum have something worthwhile to contribute, even if they're newbies.  However, I've often seen too many responses in a condescending attitude from certain participants; that does not create a healthy atmosphere for participation.
And it must the crankiness that comes with old age but I'm gonna call it when i see it.

well... we are newbies who are snapping images much much better than you though.  yep,  i am darn sure that my experience on photoshop and snapping an image is much much better than you by taking a look at your images

Quote
PBD: where maximising the lower capabilities of the Canon are not enough, where worthwhile real world images could only be shot with a Nikon. In truth I have never been shown one, not one single real world image, only lots of artificially set up and badly exposed "tests".

What I've generally stated is that the superior sensor performance of the other mfr's cameras allow a lot more creative freedom in post and simplified shooting in the field because we don't have to try wring the best from a mediocre product.
I and others have also stated that it's certainly a benefit to be able to recover from an underexposed shot, or to be able to compress the contrast in a shot with lots of dynamic range, so that the shadows aren't wrecked by pattern noise.  There are enough real-world situations where this is an issue.
I've made prints from my 5d2 and 7d that people think are great!  Sure.  I wonder what they'd have thought about the same images if I could have lifted the dark levels a little like I wanted to, so a hint of the detail hiding there could be seen - preferably without the stripes.

I don't know who said it but taking your dark print outside to view in sunlight to see the shadow details is not often an appropriate option!
This is when shadow range compression (lifting) is beneficial and when patterned noise cameras, like most contemporary Canons, are not up to the task in the more extreme cases.

Artificially contrived tests are what you use when you do research.  It's called a controlled environment to minimize variables.  It's daft to suggest such tests do not have merit, people need to understand how they work and how the results will apply to real world shooting.  If someone can't understand that, it's gonna be pretty hard to teach them much of anything.

oh my god, i wonder who would like to learn from you?  i do not...

Quote
PBD: I shoot a lot of very high dynamic range images, a Nikon would not serve me better.
That's true, but it is irrelevant! ;)
HDR can even be done with an 8-bit compact camera.

if nikon is that good dynamic range, i wonder why number of nikon users are using hdr.

BORROW JAY MAISEL QUOTE TO EDUCATE YOU:  "TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT".

198
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III Dynamic Range
« on: February 09, 2013, 02:47:43 PM »
he will not being able to simply because all of this images are crappy, from color to composition through number of years being photographer unless he goes out there and steal one.  you can tell by taking a look at his images via provided link in previous post.

sigh... i thought that i am saying i am getting tired of talking to these type of people, who have been talking about the same topic for a year (over a year when including other forums like dpreview, photographyblog, etc...), nothing else...

proof:  http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50383414

umm.... "IARNA International anti-banding and read out noise Association" never heard of it... might be there are two member one is president and another one is vice president LOL...

199
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III Dynamic Range
« on: February 08, 2013, 09:22:45 PM »
that means he is waiting for "flame war" with his pop corn... hic.. hic... i am getting tired of that too.  however, back to your question.  below is the link to show you the good way:

HDR Ep 115: Take & Make Great Photography with Gavin Hoey: Adorama Photography TV

I just wanted to pop in and say THANKS for posting that!  I open all image formats with ACR already for the controls, and saving as a 32-bit TIFF and reusing ACR for the controls is neat!  I usually do the HDR Pro and save from that, but I'll try it this way from now on.

glad that i can help.  for anyone being out there who has been wondered about bryan peterson's hair.  got a message from mark wallace conforming that bryan is just fine, nothing to do with his health.  he just lost a bet to his daughter so he had to shave...

200
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III Dynamic Range
« on: February 08, 2013, 06:51:21 PM »
RLPhoto, can you share me your pop corn... i am running out of it  ;D

201
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III Dynamic Range
« on: February 08, 2013, 01:42:20 PM »
that means he is waiting for "flame war" with his pop corn... hic.. hic... i am getting tired of that too.  however, back to your question.  below is the link to show you the good way:

HDR Ep 115: Take & Make Great Photography with Gavin Hoey: Adorama Photography TV

202
...POST YOUR IMAGES HERE THAT SHOW THE FLAW THAT RUINED THE SHOT FOR YOU

Addendum - to give you an example, here's a scaled shot taken with a 5D Mark II and EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II
The image is basically ruined by garish, multi-outlined bokeh.  This is not a crop, this is the full frame.
20mm at f/4.0

1. not my "art" images but i do think that all these images were ruined (scott kelby has his free critiq session, send them to him and ask to see if my thought is right.  i do trust scott eyes):  http://a2bart.com/gallery/new/new.htm  (wonder that why it is call a-b not a-z LOL)
2. "a scaled shot taken with a 5D Mark II and EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II... 20mm at f/4.0":  show me how you go back and shoot with that focal lengh?  if you should that with 20mm at f/4, i should not see that shallow dof, if i do not want to say that it should be all of them in focus (assume that you were not climbing on the tree to shoot that image  8)).
3. an experience photographer would not choose f4 in shooting the posted image (assume that you were shooting at focal of 200mm)


203
The difference between a .CR2 or .NEF file and a DNG is that you can work the RAW file and then save to DNG and it appears unedited, you have clearly already edited the Canon file. What tiny bit of credibility you had due to your obviously limited but deep knowledge of one specific of a sensor has just been blown out of the water.

Mikael, you are an irrelevance.

Now I'm interested. Please show me a set of files - one .cr2 and one .dng made from that cr2 file - where the image data inside the DNG has been significantly altered...?

Of course it can be done. I could change the content of just about any raw file from any camera maker. Canon and some others have a control sum data tag that is supposed to protect against that kind of tampering, but that checksum encoding has been cracked since several years. So it's definitely not impossible, it just takes some work.

What I question is the general availability of those tools, and that you think that just about anyone can do it. AND the fact that you erroneously think that any normal program can change the image content of a raw file before saving it as a DNG. Yes, some EXIF tags may be repositioned, and some extra data may be saved - but the original image data is copied in a bit-perfect way. Bit-perfect as in "no single bit of the resulting image surface has changed between the original raw and the dng".

(actually that isn't 100% true, only 99.999% - Since Nikon and also Sony can use a kind of gamma / area coherency compression when saving a raw file, round-off faults in the conversion can appear since the DNG is LS-JPEG compressed, without gamma. That is, errors on the scale of +/-1 bit in a 14-bit file, or errors more than 13Ev down)

But still, show me the two files where the DNG has been seriously and provably tampered with. YOUR files, not someone elses.

agree... i think that he thought that we have no way to find out or compare the two files.  he is totally wrong... LOL

204
Could a mod move all the Mikael Canon vs. Nikon stuff to some separate, dedicated thread for that topic? I would really prefer we don't destroy ANOTHER thread with the same old debate. People HAVE been asking for Mikaels original RAW files, but that discussion really doesn't belong in this topic. It belongs elsewere, isolated, in its own little world where the debate that will inevitably rage on won't ruin any other peaceful discussions.
+as many as I am allowed. He is destroying the fun of being here.......
agreed

"...meaning of sensor physics = read out noise and why banding occurs?"

i am laughing my a*s off when reading your "meaning of sensor physics".

205
you are a fanny man
I got this answer
what shall we do? what shall we do?
and stop accusing me, you will lose

I haven't accused you of anything, so I have nothing to lose. Try send each individually, duh! The Canon file will 100% come down I email them often. How big is the D800 file?

use rapidshare or mediafire instead...

206
yes Im paid 40000USD / month + what ever gears I want.
ugly? Im showing the different sensors characteristics, I have aspirations to make the picture quite

yep, those are ugly.  not those images in here.  i am saying those images that you have taken for universities and images that you have posted on you facebook (if they are all the right one).
yes they are, but I have been living on this ugly pictures as a photographer since 1984, how about you?

your mail box was to small

taking images is not my career though, but i know that i am better than you from taking picture to probalby science (chemistry, physics, math, programming languages, you name it but not biology) too...

207
yes Im paid 40000USD / month + what ever gears I want.
ugly? Im showing the different sensors characteristics, I have aspirations to make the picture quite

yep, those are ugly.  not those images in here.  i am saying those images that you have taken for universities and images that you have posted on you facebook (if they are all the right one).

REALLY, SHOW ME YOUR BEST OF BEST IMAGE AND DO NOT GO OUT THERE AND JUST STEAL LIKE YOU HAVE DONE AIITE...  I DO NOT JUDGE IT MYSELF BUT I WILL LET SCOTT KELBY (A PHOTOSHOP MASTER AND NIKON SHOOTER) JUDGE IT...

208
you do not understand  the difference, I can use what ever shutter speed . f-stop I want  with one exposure, tell me how can you do the same with the camera on a tripod and taking 2 or more exposure. ?    a example: running people in front of the camera and sunset behind, or fast running cars  or what ever

1. yes, those posted images were taken only one exposure and no repeat shot
2. with tripod or without tripod, you can take hdr depending on you iso and skill, want to learn? learn yourself from jay maisel.
3. people in my picture were not my subject, therefore, i careless.  however, i consider that as a lucky thing since it is add more live to the image (imo)

sigh... i am getting tired of talking to old guy like you...

and ? Nikon has still 14 stops DR and Canon 5dmk2  11 including pattern noise . 6D has 11.5 stops DR and less pattern pattern noise than 5dmk2 , what is it you do not understand?
and that picture you show has no DR at all, flat and rather ugly ( and remember that is my personal view on your picture)

those images are better than yours though... i am not that stupid to pay for that much money per month even though my pay rate is more than double (if i do not want to say triple) the shown amount per year...

209
you do not understand  the difference, I can use what ever shutter speed . f-stop I want  with one exposure, tell me how can you do the same with the camera on a tripod and taking 2 or more exposure. ?    a example: running people in front of the camera and sunset behind, or fast running cars  or what ever

1. yes, those posted images were taken only one exposure and no repeat shot
2. with tripod or without tripod, you can take hdr depending on you iso and skill, want to learn? learn yourself from jay maisel.
3. people in my picture were not my subject, therefore, i careless.  however, i consider that as a lucky thing since it is add more live to the image (imo)

sigh... i am getting tired of talking to old guy like you...

and ? Nikon has still 14 stops DR and Canon 5dmk2  11 including pattern noise . 6D has 11.5 stops DR and less pattern pattern noise than 5dmk2 , what is it you do not understand?

did i say that i am careless about that one and i do care about clean noise at high iso, not full of color noise like nikon?  if you care, keep it for yourself since number of us in here have shown no appreciation about what you are talking about.  why making noise, nikon hire you to say that in here?

210
you do not understand  the difference, I can use what ever shutter speed . f-stop I want  with one exposure, tell me how can you do the same with the camera on a tripod and taking 2 or more exposure. ?    a example: running people in front of the camera and sunset behind, or fast running cars  or what ever

1. yes, those posted images were taken only one exposure and no repeat shot
2. with tripod or without tripod, you can take hdr depending on you iso and skill, want to learn? learn yourself from jay maisel.
3. people in my picture were not my subject, therefore, i was careless.  however, i consider that as a lucky thing since it is add more live to the image (imo)

sigh... i am getting tired of talking to old guy like you...

Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 25