Originally Posted by Sheiky
Feel free to peruse around any of the inside church weddings at www.tomwertman.com. I try to maintain consistent color throughout the ceremony and capture color in stained glass as well. Highlights can get blown out but not to the extent of these samples on this thread.
Tom
Here is one example.
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.22.75/Cruz-038-copy.jpg[/img]
So it is the opposite direction from what Jan and I were saying...
But then, don't you lose 1/3 stop in the darks instead of in the highlights? Doesn't doing a linear digital push leave you with no data at the low end of the raw file? Or do you mean you lose 1/3 stop of highlight headroom as compared to iso1600 underexposed by 1/3 stop (but not as compared to a "correctly" exposed picture?
Anyway, it bad.
If canon would just leave the raw alone, the world would be a better place.
Normally it would mean you lose 1/3 in the highlights *and* some in the shadows, but in this case it's only highlights because two of Canon's flaws cancel each other out in the shadows. I'll explain:
If Canon allowed their engineers to design the camera, then they would choose the correct design design where raw files have a bit depth appropriate for the noise level. In that case, mucking about with the raw data like this would have negative consequences in the deep shadows by causing quantization error. Such posterization would probably cause the loss of even more than 1/3 stop, but that's in shadows much darker and deeper than most photographers ever go, so in practice most people wouldn't notice even if it caused the loss of a full stop. Of course, if you were going to choose a sensible design you wouldn't allow this sort of mucking about in the first place.
In any case, the reality of the situation is that Canon cameras are clearly not designed by the engineering department, but the Marketing department. So instead of a sensible raw file design (11 or 12 bits), they use 14-bits. At normal ISO settings, all those extra bits go to waste. But on the 1/3 stop ISO settings, where Canon mucks about with the raw data for no reason, the extra bits prevent quantization error. So the two flaws cancel each other out. Of course it would be better if we had neither flaw, but oh well.
If Canon had a *really* good design, like Nikon's compressed NEF, then mucking with the raw would have *really* bad effects, because then it would affect *all* tonal levels instead of just shadows. That's precisely what Nikon does and there are some NEF files floating around that show the damage (posterized skies, etc.). Nikon seems to combine brilliance with stupidity, while Canon is more of mediocrity with mediocrity. At least we have variety. []
Technically, no. That's because raw files don't go from white to black, they go from white to noise. You just put black wherever you want (most people choose a spot that is far away from the noise). Because of this, the net effect is that it basically just decreases the resolution that it can quantize with throughout all the tonal levels. In Canon cameras, photon shot noise will completely hide the loss in resolution at all tonal levels except for the deepest shadows, so that's the only place where the negative effect could be seen (if it had a more appropriate bit depth).
On these ISO settings, Canon literally takes the top 1/3 stop of values and deletes them.
Agreed. And if the engineers could somehow find a way to trick the Marketing department into thinking they were designing the cameras one way, but secretly do it the correct way. Oh, I can dream...
Too much lost detail in the white shirt in the first two shots is a good indicator of over exposure.
Tom
They're really all great!
I like the Cathedral Shot #5 a lot.
Also shot #1 and #2 are screaming out to be reprocessed in Black and white.
I would love to see you re-post them in B&W if you agree.
Rich
Thank you!
Good suggestion. I'll repost those when I have the chance.
Among other things, Daniel, Tom and others, thanks for your help regarding the 5D II's noise performance. This series was literally my first real outing with the new body, so, having come from a 40D background, I was out to see what the camera could really do. I will also point out that I forgot to include the exposure compensation information when uploading the pictures. The final shot of the rock formation is intentionally underexposed. That was the look I was going for (and please apply that rule of thumb to the rest of the set).
I'll also point out that all of my posted images are adjusted (exposure-,contrast and saturation-wise) to taste. My exposure levels may not be "right-on" - and many times I tend to push contrast (especially in the barn shot) - but if slight over/underexposure or increased contrast results in an image that matches the vision I had in mind when I took each shot, I'm happy. And so is my family when they see prints. []
Thanks again for your feedback and supplementary information.
Alex
Thanks alot, Dave.
I say go for it. You have worked hard, and you certainly deserve it!
Now I feel weird about this whole thing - I'm in my final year of high school. Just saying. [H]
Here's one more from the other day... I grabbed this shot as I rode past the scene of a car accident (I believe everyone was OK), where some firefighters were leaning on the guard rail and seemed to be exhausted after a long day of hard work.
Check it out:
5D Mark II, EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS, 1/1000 sec., f/2.8, ISO 200 @ 200mm. Minor sharpening and lowered saturation in Lightroom 2.0. I kind of like the fact that you can see the "TORONTO" embroidered into the back of their jackets - Sort of cool.
C&C welcome.
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.26.94/GardinerCrash_2D00_1.jpg[/img]
Ah the Gardner Expressway! Living in Rochester NY we get to Toronto often. I love the city. Great shot. Judging your work and comments you made regarding your technical prowess of the camera I would say you have a nice future ahead of you as a photog if you decide to pursue it.
Tom
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote