K-5 - High DR example

dexmus · 05-28-2011, 05:56 PM

This first photo was exposed for the building. As you can see, highlights in the sky, and the street lamp are clipped

This second picture was exposed for the sky. Here the sky and the lamp look good.

The final image is derived from the second image, and adjusted the tone curve for shadows to get to the final image.

Note - this is not 'HDR' processing or combination of multiple exposures. This is just the second image, adjusted for mid level tones.
The final image perfectly represents the light that was available in the scene.

cheers,

Abhi

**Ash** · 05-28-2011, 06:35 PM

Each version certainly has a lot of retained detail.
Are these ISO 80?

JohnBee · 05-28-2011, 06:44 PM

Wow these are great!

Which image best represents the actual lighting?
I find the last image to have the most potential, but the tonal range is off within the scene(due to the mid and shadows levels) and so it looks flat in contrast(< literally

).

Anyways, I don't mean to throw criticisms around like I'm some expert or anything, I just thought I would share my observations with you on that.

Great example of DR btw and I'm glad you posted it with us.

dexmus · 05-28-2011, 07:32 PM

Originally posted by Ash

Each version certainly has a lot of retained detail.
Are these ISO 80?

The first one (with clipped highlights), is ISO 320.

The second one is ISO 80.

Originally posted by JohnBee:

Which image best represents the actual lighting?
I find the last image to have the most potential, but the tonal range is off within the scene(due to the mid and shadows levels) and so it looks flat in contrast(< literally ).

Anyways, I don't mean to throw criticisms around like I'm some expert or anything, I just thought I would share my observations with you on that.

Great example of DR btw and I'm glad you posted it with us.

The last image represents the actual lighting. Last is basically the same image as the second one (same raw file).

I agree that it may look flat because I just did a quick pull of mid and low tones. Probably can be adjusted through curves. I am aware of what you can pull from an image, so all criticisms are welcome. Here is the second raw file from above, reprocessed for more punch than the third one.

cheers,

Abhi

Last edited by dexmus; 05-28-2011 at 07:38 PM.

05-28-2011, 05:56 PM	#1
dexmus Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: United States Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 392	K-5 - High DR example This first photo was exposed for the building. As you can see, highlights in the sky, and the street lamp are clipped This second picture was exposed for the sky. Here the sky and the lamp look good. The final image is derived from the second image, and adjusted the tone curve for shadows to get to the final image. Note - this is not 'HDR' processing or combination of multiple exposures. This is just the second image, adjusted for mid level tones. The final image perfectly represents the light that was available in the scene. cheers, Abhi

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Example of AF, DR, high ISO and high shutter speed on K-5	benisona	Pentax DSLR Discussion	17	11-30-2010 02:25 PM
K-7 high ISO vs K20D high ISO	supa007	Pentax DSLR Discussion	72	05-10-2010 04:24 PM
Cityscape London high	Mindaugas	Post Your Photos!	7	01-13-2010 05:05 PM
Abstract Sky High	nate_b	Post Your Photos!	2	12-22-2009 10:31 AM
climbin' high	dcmsox2004	Post Your Photos!	4	06-27-2009 08:52 PM

05-28-2011, 06:35 PM	#2
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	Each version certainly has a lot of retained detail. Are these ISO 80?

05-28-2011, 06:44 PM	#3
JohnBee Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Newrfoundland Photos: Albums Posts: 4,667	Wow these are great! Which image best represents the actual lighting? I find the last image to have the most potential, but the tonal range is off within the scene(due to the mid and shadows levels) and so it looks flat in contrast(< literally ). Anyways, I don't mean to throw criticisms around like I'm some expert or anything, I just thought I would share my observations with you on that. Great example of DR btw and I'm glad you posted it with us.

05-28-2011, 07:32 PM	#4
dexmus Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: United States Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 392 Original Poster	Originally posted by Ash Each version certainly has a lot of retained detail. Are these ISO 80? The first one (with clipped highlights), is ISO 320. The second one is ISO 80. Originally posted by JohnBee: Which image best represents the actual lighting? I find the last image to have the most potential, but the tonal range is off within the scene(due to the mid and shadows levels) and so it looks flat in contrast(< literally ). Anyways, I don't mean to throw criticisms around like I'm some expert or anything, I just thought I would share my observations with you on that. Great example of DR btw and I'm glad you posted it with us. The last image represents the actual lighting. Last is basically the same image as the second one (same raw file). I agree that it may look flat because I just did a quick pull of mid and low tones. Probably can be adjusted through curves. I am aware of what you can pull from an image, so all criticisms are welcome. Here is the second raw file from above, reprocessed for more punch than the third one. cheers, Abhi Last edited by dexmus; 05-28-2011 at 07:38 PM.