[nandadevieast]

I am new to Canon.

Canon users here, do you use or recommend HTP?

And what is the consensus on DPP vs. LR?

Thanks

Anurag

[JJ_SO]

First you gave up two full f-stops by exchanging D800 against EOS 6D and saying "artists don't need DR", now you're asking for highlight tone priority. What else is that than simulation of greater DR? 

[Brightcolours]

First you gave up two full f-stops by exchanging D800 against EOS 6D and saying "artists don't need DR", now you're asking for highlight tone priority. What else is that than simulation of greater DR? 

The 6D has more than enough DR. 

Anyway, highlight tone priority is the opposite of HDR or silly shadow lifting for several stops. It applies a different tonal curve, compressing the dark tonal part and giving more detail to the highlight part.

[JJ_SO]

"The 6D has more than enough DR." depends on what one wants to do. For most people, me included, 16 MP would also count as "more than enough MP" as well as cars don't need to run faster than 140 km/h. It's pretty much the same as saying b/w prints on RC have more than enough grayscale although one  can clearly identify the difference of RC paper prints and FB paper prints if both are exposed and developed carefully.

 

I still prefer having as much DR as possible although I know common displays or prints can't show 12 f-stops (of 6D). It's a bit of extra security if I can't check exposure after each shot on a live histogram. The one of the camera is just too tiny.

 

Anyway, if you say "silly shadow lifting" it doesn't sound you're fully-hearted using it?

[Brightcolours]

"The 6D has more than enough DR." depends on what one wants to do. For most people, me included, 16 MP would also count as "more than enough MP" as well as cars don't need to run faster than 140 km/h. It's pretty much the same as saying b/w prints on RC have more than enough grayscale although one  can clearly identify the difference of RC paper prints and FB paper prints if both are exposed and developed carefully.

 

I still prefer having as much DR as possible although I know common displays or prints can't show 12 f-stops (of 6D). It's a bit of extra security if I can't check exposure after each shot on a live histogram. The one of the camera is just too tiny.

 

Anyway, if you say "silly shadow lifting" it doesn't sound you're fully-hearted using it?

A normal tonal curve shows about 7 to 8 stops. It is not about monitors and/or prints being able to show more (prints do about 6 stops). That leaves 4 to 5 stops extra headroom, that is why I say it has more than enough DR. 

You would not want to look at a 14 stops DR image, it looks very grey and very flat.

 

If you want to do HDR tonal mapped images, you are better of shooting more than 1 image. Also with a Sony sensor. Why? Because the information density (tonality) at the dark part of RAW is low. With 2 or more bracketed images, you resolve that issue.

 

I don't lift shadows, I do not dislike contrast. And if a scene is unattractive, I don't make photos of it. Or I discard the images. I don't try to make them a bit less unattractive by lifting shadows, as they remain unattractive...

[JJ_SO]

If printer or screen cannot reproduce a 14 stops image, how could I possibly look at one? Nature often has more contrast than 14 f-stops. Our eyes adapt because we're always only looking at parts pf the whole picture.

 

I sometimes lift the shadows a bit and lower the highlights to get the impression I had when shooting the picture. This has nothing to do with flat contrast although I'm lowering the contrast, but keep the full range of tonality. Only thing I'm saying: There is more tonality on a 14 stops RAW than on a 12 stops RAW to play with, to adjust exposure (if something went wrong with metering, I'm stil able to get good picture). I don't know about Canon, but lifted shadows of Nikon 14 bit RAWs keep a lot of power, they do look black, not muddy.

 

Most HDRs I don't like as they are often exaggerated beyond sense just for the effect of it. I tried a bit with HDR but found better to care for exposure and bring the 14 f-stop range to good limits. Of course, extreme highlights will be gone anyway, but that's hardly a reason for me to do static HDR-bracketing. Most of the time there's not much more information in the highlights and they are known to blow out if contrast is too hefty. Do I need to see the shape of a bulb and the filament inside when I'm doing a stage shot? The musician is the object of interest, not the spotlight.

 

I'm not doing anything else than I was doing with film when I had the same problem: film records up to 11 or more f-stops, paper prints hardly show more than 7-8 f-stops. Playing with shadows and highlights adds information at best - and is distracting at worst. I like to be free in what I'm doing and not limited by a smaller DR, although I'm aware I don't always need it. 

[Brightcolours]

Colour film does not reach 11 stops. BW film might, there are contrasty (low DR) BW films and low contrast (high DR) BW films. The high DR films look super bland. Positive slide film reaches 5-6 stops.

 

You can't have lifted shadows that look black, if they look black you have not lifted them.

 

You can only look ate a 14 stops DR image by compressing the 14 stops into the stops your medium allows. Lets say 8 stops. What would be black in normal 8 stop tonal curve now is a grey, what would be white with a normal tonal curve also is a grey. The white and black points have shifted.

 

This is what 14 stops of DR looks like, compressed into a 8 stop space:



On the left a normal contrasty tonal curve, on the right a similar curve but stretched out to cover 14 stops of DR.

[JJ_SO]

Colour film does not reach 11 stops. BW film might, there are contrasty (low DR) BW films and low contrast (high DR) BW films. The high DR films look super bland. Positive slide film reaches 5-6 stops.

Kodachrome was a colored b/w film and goes beyond 5-6 stops - which I doubt for slides, but never measured, so you might be right.
I was referring to b/w film, you're right, color negative has a lower range.
 

You can't have lifted shadows that look black, if they look black you have not lifted them.

With "black" I meant the shadows didn't went purple, grainy or other sort of powerless bunch of flat colors in a part of the picture I expect dark shadows. I could have said "dark grey", but even then you would argue against, I guess.
 

You can only look ate a 14 stops DR image by compressing the 14 stops into the stops your medium allows. Lets say 8 stops. What would be black in normal 8 stop tonal curve now is a grey, what would be white with a normal tonal curve also is a grey. The white and black points have shifted.

If you're compressing a 14 stop picture to 8 stops it is no longer a 14 stop picture, that's simple logic. If you're drying an apple the result will be dry fruit, looking less colourful than the apple was and containing not the same amount of water. Sometimes I get the impression you're misunderstanding on purpose just to keep your position.

[Brightcolours]

Kodachrome was a colored b/w film and goes beyond 5-6 stops - which I doubt for slides, but never measured, so you might be right.

I was referring to b/w film, you're right, color negative has a lower range.

 


With "black" I meant the shadows didn't went purple, grainy or other sort of powerless bunch of flat colors in a part of the picture I expect dark shadows. I could have said "dark grey", but even then you would argue against, I guess.

 


If you're compressing a 14 stop picture to 8 stops it is no longer a 14 stop picture, that's simple logic. If you're drying an apple the result will be dry fruit, looking less colourful than the apple was and containing not the same amount of water. Sometimes I get the impression you're misunderstanding on purpose just to keep your position.

I am not misunderstanding anything at all. An 8 stop image looks right, a 14 stop image does not. Maybe it looks ok to you in a virtual world where one can display it in a way unknown to our real world.... But photos are there to be looked at in real. So, what do you want to argue? That 14 stops looks good but one can't see/view it? Or that 14 stops looks good when compressed into a lower DR, with all its flatness and greyness?

[nandadevieast]

First you gave up two full f-stops by exchanging D800 against EOS 6D and saying "artists don't need DR", now you're asking for highlight tone priority. What else is that than simulation of greater DR? 

HI Joju,

Just wanted to ask what this feature does and how useful it is...should i just ignore it.

With 'artists' i meant to say, photographers have always found a workaround for these small things.

My switch has nothing to do with DR. Which is a good thing for post processing. It was to do with other factors like usability, handling, lack of the lenses i need, missed shots due to unsure focussing...basically i was fighting with my camera all the time.

These things are much more important than DR to me.

Landscape shooters can bracket their shots...they have all the time in the world.

I am sure its good while shooting as you don't get blinkies that often, and good in post processing...some people do HDR stuff and i am sure they have a use for it. But in my experience i need to crunch the DR to get more contrast while printing or making final image...in 100% cases. You can't make flat pictures.

Yesterday 12 stops were great, today 14 stops are great. A7s is bringing more than 15 stops of DR.

Question is, what you do with that.