August 21, 2014, 04:05:35 PM

Author Topic: Dynamic Range vs. Exposure Range, and why the difference matters  (Read 9392 times)

Jeff

  • Power Shot G16
  • **
  • Posts: 22
    • View Profile
    • DC Architectural Photographer
Re: Dynamic Range vs. Exposure Range, and why the difference matters
« Reply #30 on: March 13, 2013, 08:37:25 PM »

If you don't have those options, and if the scene you photographed clips white and black, what do you do?

You can overexpose the negative to expose for the shadows and then either shorten the amount of time the negative is in the developer N-1 N-2 or you could transfer the negatives to a water bath during the development stage to allow the highlighted areas longer time to develop.

sorry couldn't resist

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Dynamic Range vs. Exposure Range, and why the difference matters
« Reply #30 on: March 13, 2013, 08:37:25 PM »

psolberg

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 453
    • View Profile
Re: Dynamic Range vs. Exposure Range, and why the difference matters
« Reply #31 on: March 13, 2013, 09:09:28 PM »
thanks for the read. interesting. however having shot canon extensively for years and having switched to the D800 for about a year now, we can debate all the stops and number etc and DXO scores; but the fact remains that in my own personal experience NOTHING touches the D800 with a canon brand in terms of overall image quality, dynamic range as perceived by my prior experience with canon. Let's not even get about the low noise in shadow areas at base ISO which the sony/Nikon sensor delivers in a way that makes even the 1DX and 5DmKIII feel like cameras that are a generation behind where they should in this area. this has been documented extensively by now. Canon simply can't perform at low ISO in the shadows if you're really going to push that DR. And I do push it, to my dismay when shooting with a canon sensor, all I get is levels of noise and banding that are ridiculous.

I will re-evaluate my gear when the 5Dmk4 and D900 get released. until then, I an only trust my eyes and I just can't see myself shooting with anything but the D800 for nothing gives me the confidence that I will recover all the detail with the least artifacts like that camera does.

sanj

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1453
    • View Profile
Re: Dynamic Range vs. Exposure Range, and why the difference matters
« Reply #32 on: March 13, 2013, 10:36:29 PM »
thanks for the read. interesting. however having shot canon extensively for years and having switched to the D800 for about a year now, we can debate all the stops and number etc and DXO scores; but the fact remains that in my own personal experience NOTHING touches the D800 with a canon brand in terms of overall image quality, dynamic range as perceived by my prior experience with canon. Let's not even get about the low noise in shadow areas at base ISO which the sony/Nikon sensor delivers in a way that makes even the 1DX and 5DmKIII feel like cameras that are a generation behind where they should in this area. this has been documented extensively by now. Canon simply can't perform at low ISO in the shadows if you're really going to push that DR. And I do push it, to my dismay when shooting with a canon sensor, all I get is levels of noise and banding that are ridiculous.

I will re-evaluate my gear when the 5Dmk4 and D900 get released. until then, I an only trust my eyes and I just can't see myself shooting with anything but the D800 for nothing gives me the confidence that I will recover all the detail with the least artifacts like that camera does.

I have met many people in real life and on internet who feel exactly like you.... :(

RLPhoto

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3354
  • Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
    • View Profile
    • My Portfolio
Re: Dynamic Range vs. Exposure Range, and why the difference matters
« Reply #33 on: March 13, 2013, 10:42:38 PM »
I stated that technique will improve DR more than any sensor will.

What techniques are you referring to to improve DR? Genuinely curious, not being pointlessly argumentative.

Are you talking about post processing like your Before/After? Making brights darker and darks lighter compresses DR and improves the image, yes. There are other ways to limit the DR requirement. You can choose to shoot when the scene doesn't greatly exceed camera capabilities. You can choose to limit the scene DR as viewed through the lens with filters, or by artificially lighting the shadows.

If you don't have those options, and if the scene you photographed clips white and black, what do you do?

Those are a few methods. I knew you'd get it sooner or later.

You stated technique will improve DR; those are a few methods which reduce it.

I understand working within capabilities. The best camera in the world is the one you have with you and all that. But is not this forum fundamentally about future technology, not working around the limitations of current technology?

Should I expect [CR2] about canon's next great camera which will audibly instruct you to take 60 a second exposure whilst waving your hand in front of the lens like you're burning in the darkroom?

However you want to put it. If you plan to wait around for future tech improvements to go out and shoot, you'll be waiting quite a while.

3kramd5

  • 7D
  • *****
  • Posts: 350
    • View Profile
Re: Dynamic Range vs. Exposure Range, and why the difference matters
« Reply #34 on: March 13, 2013, 11:19:57 PM »
If you plan to wait around for future tech improvements to go out and shoot, you'll be waiting quite a while.

lol, okay.
5D3, 5D2, 40D; Various lenses

bdunbar79

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2558
    • View Profile
Re: Dynamic Range vs. Exposure Range, and why the difference matters
« Reply #35 on: March 13, 2013, 11:20:25 PM »
thanks for the read. interesting. however having shot canon extensively for years and having switched to the D800 for about a year now, we can debate all the stops and number etc and DXO scores; but the fact remains that in my own personal experience NOTHING touches the D800 with a canon brand in terms of overall image quality, dynamic range as perceived by my prior experience with canon. Let's not even get about the low noise in shadow areas at base ISO which the sony/Nikon sensor delivers in a way that makes even the 1DX and 5DmKIII feel like cameras that are a generation behind where they should in this area. this has been documented extensively by now. Canon simply can't perform at low ISO in the shadows if you're really going to push that DR. And I do push it, to my dismay when shooting with a canon sensor, all I get is levels of noise and banding that are ridiculous.

I will re-evaluate my gear when the 5Dmk4 and D900 get released. until then, I an only trust my eyes and I just can't see myself shooting with anything but the D800 for nothing gives me the confidence that I will recover all the detail with the least artifacts like that camera does.

Canon WINS at the high ISO realm/sports realm.  Hands down.  Nikon wins at low ISO.  Apparently there is better DR in Nikon sensors at low ISO.  This is not reflected in sales, however.  So really, nobody cares.
2 x 1DX
Big Ten, GLIAC, NCAC

V8Beast

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 919
    • View Profile
    • Stephen Kim Automotive Photography
Re: Dynamic Range vs. Exposure Range, and why the difference matters
« Reply #36 on: March 14, 2013, 12:24:25 AM »

I will re-evaluate my gear when the 5Dmk4 and D900 get released. until then, I an only trust my eyes and I just can't see myself shooting with anything but the D800 for nothing gives me the confidence that I will recover all the detail with the least artifacts like that camera does.

So I take it that you're still hanging around a Canon forum waiting for rumors on the 5D4? Talk about being proactive ;D

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Dynamic Range vs. Exposure Range, and why the difference matters
« Reply #36 on: March 14, 2013, 12:24:25 AM »

jrista

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3939
  • POTATO
    • View Profile
    • Nature Photography
Re: Dynamic Range vs. Exposure Range, and why the difference matters
« Reply #37 on: March 14, 2013, 01:17:03 AM »
thanks for the read. interesting. however having shot canon extensively for years and having switched to the D800 for about a year now, we can debate all the stops and number etc and DXO scores; but the fact remains that in my own personal experience NOTHING touches the D800 with a canon brand in terms of overall image quality, dynamic range as perceived by my prior experience with canon. Let's not even get about the low noise in shadow areas at base ISO which the sony/Nikon sensor delivers in a way that makes even the 1DX and 5DmKIII feel like cameras that are a generation behind where they should in this area. this has been documented extensively by now. Canon simply can't perform at low ISO in the shadows if you're really going to push that DR. And I do push it, to my dismay when shooting with a canon sensor, all I get is levels of noise and banding that are ridiculous.

I will re-evaluate my gear when the 5Dmk4 and D900 get released. until then, I an only trust my eyes and I just can't see myself shooting with anything but the D800 for nothing gives me the confidence that I will recover all the detail with the least artifacts like that camera does.

Agreed, D800 and D600 DR is amazing. The DR from current Canon cameras is nothing to shake a stick at, either, though. Keep in mind, go back five or six years, and most cameras couldn't break the 8-9 stop barrier for dynamic range. The fact that pretty much every Canon camera from the last 4-5 years is in the 11-12 stop range means they offer great dynamic range. The computer screens of most people are 8 bit, so you can only really see eight stops of DR on them anyway. Some people are lucky enough to have a 10 bit screen, and an even fewer lucky ducks have a 14-16 bit screen with a hardware LUT and hardware dithering that can almost display the 11-14 stop photos modern cameras are capable of on screen in all their full glory.

Another thing to consider is that print is still limited to maybe 7 stops at most on the best of the best paper with the highest L* and deepest dMax. More often, especially with fine art papers, you get 5 stops.

The benefit of more DR is shadow pushing or highlight recovery (usually shadow pushing) in post. In that respect, at low ISO, the D800 is certainly king, and offers two extra stops over anything from Canon. Just don't let that make you think the 5D III or any other Canon camera "sucks" though...12 stops of DR is still amazing, and will take you very far, and is more than sufficient in the vast majority of cases.  There are limited sitiations where extreme DR is necessary...landscapes is one. If you have the option of night sky photography at low ISO, that could be another (i.e. extremely long exposures on a guided tracking mount could look phenomenal at ISO 200). "Mistakes" are of course another area where having super-clean shadows is a great time to have tons of extra DR. In most other situations, I'd say the desire to have good contrast overpowers the benefits of dynamic range. Increased contrast is kind of at odds with increased dynamic range...you either attenuate the contrast curve (and lose DR in the final image), or flatten the contrast curve (and gain DR, up to what your camera offers, in the final image).
My Photography
Current Gear: Canon 5D III | 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: SBIG STT-8300M | Canon EF 300mm f/2.8 L II

J.R.

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1469
  • A Speedlight Junkie!
    • View Profile
Re: Dynamic Range vs. Exposure Range, and why the difference matters
« Reply #38 on: March 14, 2013, 01:37:12 AM »
Interesting discussion. One does wonder though what would happen if Canon came close to Nikon's DR in low ISO at the cost of losing a stop or two in High ISO.

Now who would want that camera?
Light is language!

jrista

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3939
  • POTATO
    • View Profile
    • Nature Photography
Re: Dynamic Range vs. Exposure Range, and why the difference matters
« Reply #39 on: March 14, 2013, 01:46:18 AM »
Interesting discussion. One does wonder though what would happen if Canon came close to Nikon's DR in low ISO at the cost of losing a stop or two in High ISO.

Now who would want that camera?

Why at the cost of losing a stop or two High ISO? The two are achieved via different means. I don't think the mechanisms by which Canon could improve Low ISO performance would by necessity eliminate the gains they have made at High ISO. The best of both worlds could be had if Canon can figure out how to reduce their read noise.
My Photography
Current Gear: Canon 5D III | 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: SBIG STT-8300M | Canon EF 300mm f/2.8 L II

Aglet

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 928
    • View Profile
Re: Dynamic Range vs. Exposure Range, and why the difference matters
« Reply #40 on: March 14, 2013, 04:00:59 AM »
Interesting discussion. One does wonder though what would happen if Canon came close to Nikon's DR in low ISO at the cost of losing a stop or two in High ISO.

Now who would want that camera?

I might.
I still prefer Canon's user interface and controls to Nikons, and only slightly over Pentax, but not enough to switch back until such an improved Canon camera is a reality.
And, for the sake of correctness, I'm not even asking for more DR, I'd like to see no FPN in new Canon sensors.  The 6D comes very close to being acceptable.  Hopefully a 7D2 will be similarly or more improved.  But, right now..
When it comes to low USO DR and lack of FPN, SoNikon cleans up on both of those metrics.

As for some of the other arguments, when it comes to difficult lighting situations, the camera with the superior sensor system is going to provide a lot more latitude and better IQ potential than the more limited one.  I don't care how good one's technique is, better tools allow that same person to expand their envelope of capabilities.
The same ones who are presently crowing how their technique is all it takes to make up for an inferior sensor system are likely going to be crowing even louder when/if they ever get their hands on a better performing camera.

Rav

  • SX50 HS
  • **
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: Dynamic Range vs. Exposure Range, and why the difference matters
« Reply #41 on: March 14, 2013, 04:08:16 AM »
The computer screens of most people are 8 bit, so you can only really see eight stops of DR on them anyway.
No.
The bit depth of a panel has no correlation with its DR. Note how there are 6bit panels with contrast of 1:800 and more. The bit depth only places bounds on the upper possible SNR in the signal chain, setting a quantization noise floor.
« Last Edit: March 14, 2013, 04:10:55 AM by Rav »
5DII, 17-40 4L, 24-70 2.8L, 70-200 4L IS, 100 2.8, 50 1.8 II

Rienzphotoz

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3322
  • Peace unto all ye Canon, Nikon & Sony shooters
    • View Profile
Re: Dynamic Range vs. Exposure Range, and why the difference matters
« Reply #42 on: March 14, 2013, 04:44:09 AM »
thanks for the read. interesting. however having shot canon extensively for years and having switched to the D800 for about a year now, we can debate all the stops and number etc and DXO scores; but the fact remains that in my own personal experience NOTHING touches the D800 with a canon brand in terms of overall image quality, dynamic range as perceived by my prior experience with canon. Let's not even get about the low noise in shadow areas at base ISO which the sony/Nikon sensor delivers in a way that makes even the 1DX and 5DmKIII feel like cameras that are a generation behind where they should in this area. this has been documented extensively by now. Canon simply can't perform at low ISO in the shadows if you're really going to push that DR. And I do push it, to my dismay when shooting with a canon sensor, all I get is levels of noise and banding that are ridiculous.

I will re-evaluate my gear when the 5Dmk4 and D900 get released. until then, I an only trust my eyes and I just can't see myself shooting with anything but the D800 for nothing gives me the confidence that I will recover all the detail with the least artifacts like that camera does.

I have met many people in real life and on internet who feel exactly like you.... :(
Ha ha ha ... Good one
Canon 5DMK3 70D | Nikon D610 | Sony a7 a6000 | RX100M3 | 16-35/2.8LII | 70-200/2.8LISII | 100/2.8LIS | 100-400LIS | 40/2.8 | 50/1.4 | 85/1.8 | 600EX-RTx2 | ST-E3-RT | 24/3.5 T-S | 10-18/4 OSS 16-50 | 24-70/4OSS | 55/1.8 | 55-210 OSS | 70-200/4 OSS | 28-300VR | HVL-F43M | GoPro Black 3+ & DJI Phantom

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Dynamic Range vs. Exposure Range, and why the difference matters
« Reply #42 on: March 14, 2013, 04:44:09 AM »

Rienzphotoz

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3322
  • Peace unto all ye Canon, Nikon & Sony shooters
    • View Profile
Re: Dynamic Range vs. Exposure Range, and why the difference matters
« Reply #43 on: March 14, 2013, 04:51:57 AM »
thanks for the read. interesting. however having shot canon extensively for years and having switched to the D800 for about a year now, we can debate all the stops and number etc and DXO scores; but the fact remains that in my own personal experience NOTHING touches the D800 with a canon brand in terms of overall image quality, dynamic range as perceived by my prior experience with canon. Let's not even get about the low noise in shadow areas at base ISO which the sony/Nikon sensor delivers in a way that makes even the 1DX and 5DmKIII feel like cameras that are a generation behind where they should in this area. this has been documented extensively by now. Canon simply can't perform at low ISO in the shadows if you're really going to push that DR. And I do push it, to my dismay when shooting with a canon sensor, all I get is levels of noise and banding that are ridiculous.

I will re-evaluate my gear when the 5Dmk4 and D900 get released. until then, I an only trust my eyes and I just can't see myself shooting with anything but the D800 for nothing gives me the confidence that I will recover all the detail with the least artifacts like that camera does.
The word photography means "drawing with light" not drawing with darkness ::) ... if I start to make my purchase decisions based on "noise in shadow areas", "dxO" etc than I probably need to worry more about my skill than some "nose in shadow areas" ::)
Canon 5DMK3 70D | Nikon D610 | Sony a7 a6000 | RX100M3 | 16-35/2.8LII | 70-200/2.8LISII | 100/2.8LIS | 100-400LIS | 40/2.8 | 50/1.4 | 85/1.8 | 600EX-RTx2 | ST-E3-RT | 24/3.5 T-S | 10-18/4 OSS 16-50 | 24-70/4OSS | 55/1.8 | 55-210 OSS | 70-200/4 OSS | 28-300VR | HVL-F43M | GoPro Black 3+ & DJI Phantom

Rienzphotoz

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3322
  • Peace unto all ye Canon, Nikon & Sony shooters
    • View Profile
Re: Dynamic Range vs. Exposure Range, and why the difference matters
« Reply #44 on: March 14, 2013, 05:05:44 AM »

I will re-evaluate my gear when the 5Dmk4 and D900 get released. until then, I an only trust my eyes and I just can't see myself shooting with anything but the D800 for nothing gives me the confidence that I will recover all the detail with the least artifacts like that camera does.

So I take it that you're still hanging around a Canon forum waiting for rumors on the 5D4? Talk about being proactive ;D
Nice reply ... LOL
Canon 5DMK3 70D | Nikon D610 | Sony a7 a6000 | RX100M3 | 16-35/2.8LII | 70-200/2.8LISII | 100/2.8LIS | 100-400LIS | 40/2.8 | 50/1.4 | 85/1.8 | 600EX-RTx2 | ST-E3-RT | 24/3.5 T-S | 10-18/4 OSS 16-50 | 24-70/4OSS | 55/1.8 | 55-210 OSS | 70-200/4 OSS | 28-300VR | HVL-F43M | GoPro Black 3+ & DJI Phantom

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Dynamic Range vs. Exposure Range, and why the difference matters
« Reply #44 on: March 14, 2013, 05:05:44 AM »