Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-18-2015, 01:44 PM   #31
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ontario
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,558
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
Me neither. I too appreciate the ETTR theory, but I prefer to build shadow data with a merged image (HDR without tone mapping) if the subject allows. I use a tool called HDRMerge. The process is analogous to compensating development with B&W film.
Cheers for the reference to HDRMerge, I've done this sort of thing by hand masking layers in Photoshop, so I'll give this program a whirl. Part of the reason I've gravitated towards photographing small subjects is it's so much easier to manipulate the lighting so the contrast isn't an absurd extreme. A little reflector will go a long way vs a frog. Less so on a landscape, so anything to simplify this kind of HDR can be nice.

08-24-2015, 10:26 AM   #32
New Member




Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 9
If you shoot raw plus jpeg would the histogram accuracy be closer to the raw file? I'm just thinking if the histogram is taken from the jpeg then maybe a bigger jpeg file will provide a more accurate histogram.

Regarding using highlight protection. As I understand it, highlight protection does come at a price - a small loss in dynamic range which mostly affects the shadow detail. This means you will introduce noise quicker in the
shadows. Probably not noticeable in general but in very contrasty shots where you want maximum dynamic range then it's probably wise to turn highlight protection off and protect your highlights by under exposing slightly. I think
this con when using highlight protection is possibly more relevant with the K5 series sensor. Maybe with the 24MB sensor on the K3 the cons are less pronounced? I'm awaiting delivery of a K3 so have yet to test..

Currently I use the K5, mainly for street photography. I shoot from the chest and often rely on TaV mode. So accurate metering is a great help to me. I found the K5 metering to be excellent compared to other cameras I use and
as a result I do not need to dial in as much exposure compensation. The K3 should be even more accurate at exposing but I expect that advantage is offset with slightly lower dynamic range so the files cannot be pushed as hard?
08-24-2015, 12:38 PM   #33
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,024
QuoteOriginally posted by norman j shearer Quote
If you shoot raw plus jpeg would the histogram accuracy be closer to the raw file? I'm just thinking if the histogram is taken from the jpeg then maybe a bigger jpeg file will provide a more accurate histogram.
The issue, Norman, isn't the file size (the number of pixels is the same) it's that the dynamic range has been crushed from 14 or 12 bits to 8.
08-24-2015, 02:04 PM   #34
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ontario
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,558
QuoteOriginally posted by norman j shearer Quote
If you shoot raw plus jpeg would the histogram accuracy be closer to the raw file? I'm just thinking if the histogram is taken from the jpeg then maybe a bigger jpeg file will provide a more accurate histogram.
I think it's still based on the embedded preview. In any case, the jpeg preview embedded into the raw files is already full resolution (someone reported this for the k3 and I checked my k5iis). The preview is of a lower * quality though, but this would have a minimal effect on the overall histogram. The main problem is as clackers has mentioned.

08-25-2015, 09:34 AM   #35
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 27,457
QuoteOriginally posted by norman j shearer Quote
If you shoot raw plus jpeg would the histogram accuracy be closer to the raw file?
The camera histogram is always based on the embedded JPEG, which is the same for both the RAW and JPEG files when shooting RAW+.

QuoteOriginally posted by BrianR Quote
In any case, the jpeg preview embedded into the raw files is already full resolution (someone reported this for the k3 and I checked my k5iis).
There is a full resolution embedded JPEG preview, but it is one of three. I am not sure, but I believe the camera uses the smallest (720x480 IIRC) for the K-3) for the rear LCD, though that sounds a little small.


Steve

Last edited by stevebrot; 08-25-2015 at 09:51 AM.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
acr, camera, clipping, color, computer, dslr, image, images, k-3, k3, lcd, pentax k-3, profile, review
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A question about post production vs actual image captured. ghostdog Ricoh GR 71 06-30-2015 05:31 PM
I'm in shock! ~ Image quality RAW vs. Jpeg Bertminator Pentax K-30 & K-50 68 03-18-2014 08:28 AM
Image-resource K3 vs image review slip Pentax K-3 22 11-10-2013 10:25 AM
JPEG vs RAW image comparison FHPhotographer Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 64 02-12-2010 11:25 AM
Actual RAW file size and recordable image number Matjazz Pentax DSLR Discussion 12 04-01-2009 04:33 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:09 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top