Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [PanoToolsNG] Ideas for next cameras

Expand Messages
  • Sacha Griffin
    No, the article was a big mess in practicality and seemed a touch out of date. Sure you get lower noise.. but so what.. the rest of your image s tonalities are
    Message 1 of 10 , Aug 2, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      No, the article was a big mess in practicality and seemed a touch out of
      date.

      Sure you get lower noise.. but so what.. the rest of your image's tonalities
      are way off and clipped. Deep blacks are supposed to be black. Once black
      there should be no noise. Plus this article seems written for the WAY back
      in the day digital cameras where noise was a serious issue. These days with
      a proper camera, you're not dealing with noise being a show stopper, it's
      all about "ACCURATE EXPOSURE". Shooting ACCURATE exposure via raw will allow
      you to compress your dynamic range somewhat and give you a semi-realistic
      image. Realistic meaning, what the eye could have seen if it was there.

      Rarely do I see high key images that impress. It's the LOW key images that
      leave an impact in my opinion.



      I think that this was generated back when getting shadow details was
      something of a lost photoshop art.. before "shadows and highlights" and the
      ugliness of bad HDR tonemapping.





      Sacha Griffin

      Southern Digital Solutions LLC - Atlanta, Georgia

      <http://www.seeit360.com> http://www.seeit360.com

      <http://twitter.com/SeeIt360> http://twitter.com/SeeIt360

      <http://www.facebook.com/panoramas/> http://www.facebook.com/panoramas/

      IM: <mailto:sachagriffin007@...> sachagriffin007@...

      Office: 404-551-4275

      GV: 404-665-9990









      From: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com [mailto:PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com] On
      Behalf Of Fabio Bustamante
      Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 10:24 PM
      To: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [PanoToolsNG] Ideas for next cameras





      Mark, thanks for your link. That's an interesting theory... but I'm not
      sure about it's practical application.

      Exposing To The Right usually means longer exposure times (you don't
      want your DOF to be messed up by ETTR). Now, longer exposure times (in
      my photography) it's not exactly the kind of luxury I always have
      available. Many times I find myself on the edge of handheld shooting and
      even on a tripod, going from 1s to 3s for the sake of ETTR could easily
      introduce unwanted exagerated motion blur (from people, cars, trees,
      whatever). Usually in these situations we consciously exchange exposure
      times by noise by increasing ISO.

      In fact, if I have practical room for 2 stops of longer exposure for the
      ETTR, I could just go from ISO 400 to 100, which gives me a great
      improvement in noise as well. So the greatest application of ETTR would
      be in situations of medium to dark scenes, with medium to very low
      dynamic range, under ISO 100 and only if the user has room for 1 or 2
      stops of longer exposure without compromising the shot (otherwise the
      user will prefer higher noise).

      In real world my issues with noise happen in problematic, low light
      situations like shooting a party, a band show etc. In these situations I
      go for very high - and noisy - ISO exactly because I need practical
      exposure times. So even if the scene has a minimum dynamic range, it
      makes no sense my camera making much longer exposures for the sake of a
      lower noise.

      Did I get it all wrong?

      - Fabio

      Em 02/08/2011 08:51, Mark D. Fink escreveu:
      > Hi Fabio,
      >
      > I would point them to this recent article in Luminous Landscape:
      >
      > http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/optimizing_exposure.shtml
      >
      > Thanks for passing this along!
      >
      > Mark
      >
      > www.northernlight.net
      > www.virtual-travels.com
      > www.pinnacle-vr.com
      >> -----Original Message-----
      >> From: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PanoToolsNG%40yahoogroups.com>
      [mailto:PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PanoToolsNG%40yahoogroups.com> ]
      On
      >> Behalf Of Fabio Bustamante
      >> Sent: Monday, August 01, 2011 11:12 PM
      >> To: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PanoToolsNG%40yahoogroups.com>
      >> Subject: [PanoToolsNG] Ideas for next cameras
      >>
      >> Hi everyone, how are you doing?
      >>
      >> Recently I was contacted by a brazilian consulting company that wanned
      >> to talk to photographers. It turns out they were working together with
      >> Nomura Research Institute (http://www.nri.co.jp/english/) a consulting
      >> company doing some research for Japanese companies related to
      >> professional photography - he mentioned Canon and Nikon.
      >>
      >> We talked today (with the help of a translator for the guy from NRI
      >> spoke japanese) and although they were interested in the particularities
      >> of the brazilian market, we also talked about equipment, and among other
      >> things they asked what kind of features I missed on my DSLR.
      >>
      >> I listed a few things that I miss the most (I mentioned better
      >> bracketing programming and full featured wireless remote control), but I
      >> also mentioned this group and that I would ask the question here too. So
      >> those of you who don't mind, feel free to share your thoughts and
      >> suggestions and I'll compile a list and send to them.
      >>
      >> I have no idea of what may come out of it, but at least I think there's
      >> a good chance that our ideas and requests will reach the right people
      >> inside camera manufacturers.
      >>
      >> Regards,
      >>
      >> Fabio.
      >>
      >>
      >> ------------------------------------
      >>
      >> --
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >
      >
      > ------------------------------------
      >





      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Sacha Griffin
      Though the article does mention without clipping I think it s still bunk. You expose for the tonality you are trying to achieve - the result, not some
      Message 2 of 10 , Aug 2, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        Though the article does mention "without clipping" I think it's still bunk.

        You expose for the tonality you are trying to achieve - the result, not some
        semi-mathematical system.

        In that nature, everyone should dial their cameras to manual and hot glue it
        there.

        J







        From: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com [mailto:PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com] On
        Behalf Of Fabio Bustamante
        Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 10:24 PM
        To: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Re: [PanoToolsNG] Ideas for next cameras





        Mark, thanks for your link. That's an interesting theory... but I'm not
        sure about it's practical application.

        Exposing To The Right usually means longer exposure times (you don't
        want your DOF to be messed up by ETTR). Now, longer exposure times (in
        my photography) it's not exactly the kind of luxury I always have
        available. Many times I find myself on the edge of handheld shooting and
        even on a tripod, going from 1s to 3s for the sake of ETTR could easily
        introduce unwanted exagerated motion blur (from people, cars, trees,
        whatever). Usually in these situations we consciously exchange exposure
        times by noise by increasing ISO.

        In fact, if I have practical room for 2 stops of longer exposure for the
        ETTR, I could just go from ISO 400 to 100, which gives me a great
        improvement in noise as well. So the greatest application of ETTR would
        be in situations of medium to dark scenes, with medium to very low
        dynamic range, under ISO 100 and only if the user has room for 1 or 2
        stops of longer exposure without compromising the shot (otherwise the
        user will prefer higher noise).

        In real world my issues with noise happen in problematic, low light
        situations like shooting a party, a band show etc. In these situations I
        go for very high - and noisy - ISO exactly because I need practical
        exposure times. So even if the scene has a minimum dynamic range, it
        makes no sense my camera making much longer exposures for the sake of a
        lower noise.

        Did I get it all wrong?

        - Fabio

        Em 02/08/2011 08:51, Mark D. Fink escreveu:
        > Hi Fabio,
        >
        > I would point them to this recent article in Luminous Landscape:
        >
        > http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/optimizing_exposure.shtml
        >
        > Thanks for passing this along!
        >
        > Mark
        >
        > www.northernlight.net
        > www.virtual-travels.com
        > www.pinnacle-vr.com
        >> -----Original Message-----
        >> From: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PanoToolsNG%40yahoogroups.com>
        [mailto:PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PanoToolsNG%40yahoogroups.com> ]
        On
        >> Behalf Of Fabio Bustamante
        >> Sent: Monday, August 01, 2011 11:12 PM
        >> To: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com <mailto:PanoToolsNG%40yahoogroups.com>
        >> Subject: [PanoToolsNG] Ideas for next cameras
        >>
        >> Hi everyone, how are you doing?
        >>
        >> Recently I was contacted by a brazilian consulting company that wanned
        >> to talk to photographers. It turns out they were working together with
        >> Nomura Research Institute (http://www.nri.co.jp/english/) a consulting
        >> company doing some research for Japanese companies related to
        >> professional photography - he mentioned Canon and Nikon.
        >>
        >> We talked today (with the help of a translator for the guy from NRI
        >> spoke japanese) and although they were interested in the particularities
        >> of the brazilian market, we also talked about equipment, and among other
        >> things they asked what kind of features I missed on my DSLR.
        >>
        >> I listed a few things that I miss the most (I mentioned better
        >> bracketing programming and full featured wireless remote control), but I
        >> also mentioned this group and that I would ask the question here too. So
        >> those of you who don't mind, feel free to share your thoughts and
        >> suggestions and I'll compile a list and send to them.
        >>
        >> I have no idea of what may come out of it, but at least I think there's
        >> a good chance that our ideas and requests will reach the right people
        >> inside camera manufacturers.
        >>
        >> Regards,
        >>
        >> Fabio.
        >>
        >>
        >> ------------------------------------
        >>
        >> --
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >
        >
        > ------------------------------------
        >





        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Erik Krause
        ... Sorry to disagree. The article is about how to get the biggest available dynamic range and provide best tonality. There are even ideas discussed how to
        Message 3 of 10 , Aug 4, 2011
        • 0 Attachment
          Am 03.08.2011 04:39, schrieb Sacha Griffin:
          > Though the article does mention "without clipping" I think it's still bunk.
          >
          > You expose for the tonality you are trying to achieve - the result, not some
          > semi-mathematical system.

          Sorry to disagree. The article is about how to get the biggest available
          dynamic range and provide best tonality. There are even ideas discussed
          how to handle this transparently for the photographer, such that the
          image looks "normal" by default.

          Basically it describes a way how to store an image optimally, not how to
          display it. Remeber, you can't view a raw image directly, you always
          need to interpret it. The way this is done currently is suboptimal.

          --
          Erik Krause
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.