April 19, 2014, 02:19:09 AM

Author Topic: Canon 5d Mark III Shadow recovery  (Read 34485 times)

art_d

  • Canon AE-1
  • ***
  • Posts: 76
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 5d Mark III Shadow recovery
« Reply #165 on: April 07, 2013, 08:05:00 PM »
Let's provide some more context to what you said:


If you were to provide just a weeee bit more context from that very same post, you might discover that I make the exact same point as the online source you found.

So what's yours? Point, I mean.

b&


That you are arguing AGAINST the value of using a camera with more DR. You've been arguing against it from the get-go, stating that you don't even need all the DR the 5D III has, let alone the D800. The only way we could interpret the print comment was that you were just making another argument against more DR, stating that since print has so little DR, having more couldn't possibly be valuable, because all the "extra" DR would just fall into "Zone 0-1", and thus just be "solid blacks".

You seem to be ignoring the fact that you can compress dynamic range. If your camera has 14 stops, you can compress those 14 into the 8 stops of a computer screen, or even the 5 stops of a print. All it takes is a little tonemapping, assuming you have the DR to start with.

Yes. Exactly what jrista wrote.

To remind you, TrumpetPower, this was my point:
"If we accept that GND filters and exposure blending are useful to address dynamic range limitations, then we come to the inevitable conclusion that sensors that natively posses more dynamic range are useful."

This is the point you then tried to refute by saying you don't gain anything by using a camera with more dynamic range because everything has to get compressed down to the dynamic range of a print. And that is just flat out wrong.

I don't know if you actually read the rest of Mike Johnston's article that I linked to, but you and he certainly were not making the same point. I will quote again from that the article (http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2009/02/dynamic-range.html):

"So why, then, if people like higher contrast in the midtones, do photographers want devices with greater dynamic range?

The answer comes down to two things. The first is options. Creative options. Having more information in the file to start with simply gives you more creative and interpretive options for the end result...."

"....The second reason is that for those who love photography because of its power to show what the world looks like, adequate DR is a critical tool in the service of realism."


My impression is you have been arguing against that. If you have not, then we can be in agreement.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon 5d Mark III Shadow recovery
« Reply #165 on: April 07, 2013, 08:05:00 PM »

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • *******
  • Posts: 12779
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 5d Mark III Shadow recovery
« Reply #166 on: April 07, 2013, 08:14:29 PM »
long story short
nice that you have seen what I have tried to explain about read noise and banding  since I started as a member here

Not really.......................................................

No one (at least, no one with a shred of objectivity) has denied that Sony/Nikon sensors have more DR than Canon sensors. But jrista is correct - the suggestion that DR at low ISO is the be-all-end-all of what matters for camera performance - for every photographer - is ludicrous and absurd.  Yet...that is exactly how the repeated Mikael/ankorwatt/etc. posts came off. That was the problem with the former persona, and I sincerely hope we don't go down that road again.

your opinion, not mine.

The suggestion that DR at low ISO is the be-all-end-all of what matters for camera performance - for every photographer - IS ludicrous and absurd.  Granted, it's my opinion that that's how your posts sounded - and clearly I'm not alone in that opinion.  But maybe that's not what you meant...
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

jrista

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 3239
  • POTATO
    • View Profile
    • Nature Photography
Re: Canon 5d Mark III Shadow recovery
« Reply #167 on: April 08, 2013, 11:18:07 AM »
long story short
nice that you have seen what I have tried to explain about read noise and banding  since I started as a member here


Just to prove my point. Here is a full-sized JPEG of the "best fit" shot from my living room. The highlights are still blown...probably by about three stops (as this was one stop down from 0EC, and it took five stops down to fully recover the highlights). There is about a stop of super deep shadow detail that is also completely lost to noise and thus unrecoverable. There IS noise, even some banding, so we are definitely at the limits of our DR. Unlike the most extreme example before, which tried to capture the entirety of the full 18 stops of DR in a single shot and expose the worst qualities of a Canon sensor, this is a the best I could do without putting a Canon sensor in the worst possible light. This is a "reasonable" recovery. It is not as good as a D800...we wouldn't have lost the highlights with the D800, only a little bit of the shadows. But it is not the "worst case possible" scenario you/Mikael have frequently put forward:


Full size (100% crop): http://i.imgur.com/VAmOF7c.jpg

BTW, this image has no noise reduction of any kind. With a little bit of basic luma NR and some Topaz DeNoise 5, those shadows can be recovered quite nicely. We are still at least four stops short of fully resolving the DR of the scene, so noise reduction will only take us so far. We might gain a stop of DR with NR. The clipped highlights are gone for good, but we can probably gain on the shadow end. If one is willing to take NR to the limits, and spend the time to extract every last ounce of detail, you could probably get away with another stop, maybe two of underexposure and still recover. It won't be as clean as a D800, and will probably still have some clipped highlights, but it also won't be riddled with the nasty red banding that is the hallmark of Mikael/Ankorwatt's attempts to prove how terrible Canon cameras are.

Hopefully this rounds out the balanced argument.
My Photography
Current Gear: Canon 7D | Canon EF 600mm f/4 L IS II | EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS | EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L | EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro | 50mm f/1.4
New Gear List: Canon 5D III/7D II | Canon EF 300mm f/2.8 L II

art_d

  • Canon AE-1
  • ***
  • Posts: 76
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 5d Mark III Shadow recovery
« Reply #168 on: April 08, 2013, 11:48:43 AM »
Topaz DeNoise is a pretty useful tool that can help minimize banding. I will add the comment that it can make areas of the photo look smudgy and plasticky if overused, though. It can obliterate banding if you crank it up, but then you'll be left with lumpy/blotchy looking shadow areas. So, moderation is key. (Even in moderation, I find after trying to fix pattern noise with it, it's usually best to add grain back into the photo to help cover the plastic look.)

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon 5d Mark III Shadow recovery
« Reply #168 on: April 08, 2013, 11:48:43 AM »