image post processing

[Groucho]

Dynamic range is not quite as simple as it seems and "HDR or not HDR" is not clear cut. Of some currently available dSLRs dynamic range can be from 13.7 stops down to 10 stops, in other words a single exposure from the first camera would cover about the same range as the second camera would if set up for HDR with +/- 2 stops!

Further, the maximum dynamic range is only at the lowest ISO and gets progressively smaller as ISO goes up, dropping to about 9 stops at 1600 ISO. Because of this it is not feasible to look at an image and clearly say "HDR" or "not HDR" since the same scene can be rendered very differently by different cameras or even by the same camera at different settings.

Yes, different cameras and different films have different levels of dynamic range - but HDR is a post-processing technique, independent of camera. If you're talking about the "HDR look", as most people are when asking specifically about it, that is a look is not like any unprocessed photo from any camera, no matter the range... the "tone mapping" is the big difference. Even in HDRs made to look realistic, IMHO they still tend to show effects like distractingly bright shadow areas and so often the dreaded halos that wouldn't be there in a camera with high dynamic range.

For example, look at samples from the Fuji S5 Pro, which has almost 12 stops of DR (even in jpg!), versus the usual 8-9 of most DSLRs (without tweaking in raw.) They have a ton of DR but look nothing like your typical HDR photo. IMHO the big difference is way the highlights and shadows "roll off" - smoother than on most DSLRs.

Dodging and burning is fine but you can do that in post-processing easily especially with Lightroom 2... without producing the "look".

 

[sabrinadv1]

So I have decided that my little p&s is great but, I need more. I have been going back and forth between a dslr or a ultrazoom. I am looking at the Olympus E-520 or the Panasonic z35. I read on Amazon that the Panasonic is capable of HDR photography. I love the colors and effects of HDR. I know it's not for everyone but, I am in love. My question is how do I know if a camera is capable of this? Out of all the cameras I have looked at the z35 is the only one that says it is capable of this. Can the E-520 not do this? What about the Nikon L100? I am so lost sorry for all the question .

 

[Shutterbug]

an hdr capable camera?

You mean it does the HDR processing in the camera?

As far as I know all you need to do HDR is 3 seperate exposures from any camera.

http://www.idigitalphoto.com/high-dynamic-range-photography-explained/

 

[sabrinadv1]

Yes some of the cameras I have been looking at have special in camera settings for HDR to make it easier I think . That's what I am trying to figure out.

 

[photo_chick]

Technically any camera can do HDR because you normally either use 3 images, or a RAW file processed at 3 different exposures then you use software to make the image.

Many cameras have a bracketing mode, which will shoot a set of images at different exposures to make creating an HDR easier.

I was curious so I just looked up the Panasonic. I didn't see anyhting saying it did HDR images in camera. It does HD, which is about resolution, not dynamic range. And High Dynamic mode does not equal an HDR image. But I could be missing something. Either way, I'm not sure I see a real advantage to processing HDR in camera.

 

[sabrinadv1]

One of the pics on Amazon said one of the best features of the z35 was it's HDR capability. I can't find any other information about it anywhere. That's what has me confused. I am reading and doing some research now. I am just on information overload at the moment.

 

[photo_chick]

I looked at the pics people posted, and yes other users are calling it an HDR mode. But it isn't creating an HDR image. Panasonic calls it high dynamic mode but from what I read no where does panasonic say it creates an HDR image nor does what they describe as the high dynamic mode make me inclined to think it creates HDR images.

But like I said, I could be missing something. It wouldn't be the first time.

 

[sabrinadv1]

No thank you that's what I was trying to figure out. I found a Nikon L100 for $150, a Fuji S1500 for $130, a Olympus E-510 for $320 w/one lense, and a Olympus E-520 for $340. The cheapest I can find the Panasonic for is $300. I think I am just going to go ahead and make the leap to the E-510. It scored better against the E-520 in the tests that I looked at. The Fuji has way too many faulty cameras for me to trust it I think. The Nikon looks nice but, it doesn't quite give me the control I want. The Nikon P100 looks nice but, for the price I can find that one I could get the E-510. So the E-510 it is............. I think maybe . I know I have alot of reading and learning to do . I need a camera to look at to understand what I am reading. If I try to read all of this without anything to practice it on I am just wasting time.

 

[photo_chick]

I'm actually a big fan of Fuji point and shoots. I got my first one back in '99, I've had a few since then, and never had any problems. My daughter has been using an S1000 since it came out and I've been very impressed with it as far as point and shoots go.

Though it really comes down to the features you want and how it feels in your hands.

 

[Daisy14'sDH]

No thank you that's what I was trying to figure out. I found a Nikon L100 for $150, a Fuji S1500 for $130, a Olympus E-510 for $320 w/one lense, and a Olympus E-520 for $340. The cheapest I can find the Panasonic for is $300. I think I am just going to go ahead and make the leap to the E-510. It scored better against the E-520 in the tests that I looked at. The Fuji has way too many faulty cameras for me to trust it I think. The Nikon looks nice but, it doesn't quite give me the control I want. The Nikon P100 looks nice but, for the price I can find that one I could get the E-510. So the E-510 it is............. I think maybe . I know I have alot of reading and learning to do . I need a camera to look at to understand what I am reading. If I try to read all of this without anything to practice it on I am just wasting time.

I know someone up here in the Great White North who has one (E510) for sale. Comes with 2 lenses, memory cards, extra battery, Lowepro slingshot 100, and some other stuff....

 

[ukcatfan]

No thank you that's what I was trying to figure out. I found a Nikon L100 for $150, a Fuji S1500 for $130, a Olympus E-510 for $320 w/one lense, and a Olympus E-520 for $340. The cheapest I can find the Panasonic for is $300. I think I am just going to go ahead and make the leap to the E-510. It scored better against the E-520 in the tests that I looked at. The Fuji has way too many faulty cameras for me to trust it I think. The Nikon looks nice but, it doesn't quite give me the control I want. The Nikon P100 looks nice but, for the price I can find that one I could get the E-510. So the E-510 it is............. I think maybe . I know I have alot of reading and learning to do . I need a camera to look at to understand what I am reading. If I try to read all of this without anything to practice it on I am just wasting time.

Make sure that you realize the DSLR will involve additional purchases that a p&s will not. You also should not just go for the lowest price.

 

[sabrinadv1]

The lowest price is not the biggest factor but, it is a factor. The fact of buying more lenses is one of the reasons I am looking at the ultra-zoom cameras. We have a CR MK view room booked for the end of May and I want good pics . I just bought a Panasonic Lumix DMC-FH20. It's great for what it is but, I would like to branch out a little more. I would also like to take some great family photos. I have 3 boys myself and a bunch of nieces and nephews. It gets expensive having someone else take our family pics. It would be nice to have one good all around camera to do all of this. I feel like at the moment I need a different camera for different situations. I am fixing to prove I am a true disser and make a spread sheet .

 

[boBQuincy]

It is entirely possible to make a camera that does HDR internally but the results may be far from what we want. HDR usually involves a lot of tweaking of the sliders/controls in the software. Even a subtle change can have a great effect on the finished image. Leaving it up to the camera may work sometimes but I would not expect a high success rate.

Once we have the three exposures, some of the software used to process them is: Photomatix; Dynamic Photo HDR; Photoshop.

 

[zackiedawg]

It's definitely possible to make a camera that can do in-camera HDR. I own one.

Actually there are more and more models capable of in-camera HDR, with varying levels of intensity and methods.

Pentax's KX DSLR can do a 3-frame HDR when the camera is mounted on a tripod - as long as there is no movement, it can blend the shots in camera...you choose how much EV difference will be between shots.

Sony's A500 and A550 DSLRs (I've got the A550) both do a 2-frame HDR - so not quite as extreme a blending range as the Pentax, however they can perform the feat handheld with no tripod. The two frames are snapped in milliseconds, and the camera has an algorithm that first aligns, then blends, the two shots, in camera. The output is a single jpeg with as much as +-2 EV difference.

Sony has extended the in-camera HDR technique to their P&S line, with the TX7, TX5 and HX5 all having the feature. The TX7 and TX5 are ultra-compact slimline pocket cams, while the HX5 is an all-in-one big-zoom camera with video and GPS.

I believe Ricoh also has two models of P&S that can do in-camera HDR as well.

The Sony version in camera is not quite as ultra-extreme fantasy style as some HDRs I see many folks post - that any camera can do by just taking multiple shots over a 2-3 EV difference between shots...the more shots the better. But cranked up to +2, the in-camera HDR can still be pretty HDR-ish, and beyond normal what-you-see-with-your-eye. These were +2 HDRs straight out of the camera:

Of course, it can be a very useful feature for just normal dynamic range stretching in challenging light and shadow situations, when you aren't going for the full fantasy look but just want to expose for extreme shadows and extreme highlights in the same shot, like this heavy shadow over the canyon area with a hugely bright noon sunny sky:

I haven't heard of Panasonics with an in-camera HDR feature as yet...but I expect it will be more and more common. If you want a quick and easy HDR without processing required, look into the Sony, Pentax, or Ricoh systems that offer it, or keep your eyes out for others with it.

 

[sabrinadv1]

:worship

It's definitely possible to make a camera that can do in-camera HDR. I own one.

Actually there are more and more models capable of in-camera HDR, with varying levels of intensity and methods.

Pentax's KX DSLR can do a 3-frame HDR when the camera is mounted on a tripod - as long as there is no movement, it can blend the shots in camera...you choose how much EV difference will be between shots.

Sony's A500 and A550 DSLRs (I've got the A550) both do a 2-frame HDR - so not quite as extreme a blending range as the Pentax, however they can perform the feat handheld with no tripod. The two frames are snapped in milliseconds, and the camera has an algorithm that first aligns, then blends, the two shots, in camera. The output is a single jpeg with as much as +-2 EV difference.

Sony has extended the in-camera HDR technique to their P&S line, with the TX7, TX5 and HX5 all having the feature. The TX7 and TX5 are ultra-compact slimline pocket cams, while the HX5 is an all-in-one big-zoom camera with video and GPS.

I believe Ricoh also has two models of P&S that can do in-camera HDR as well.

The Sony version in camera is not quite as ultra-extreme fantasy style as some HDRs I see many folks post - that any camera can do by just taking multiple shots over a 2-3 EV difference between shots...the more shots the better. But cranked up to +2, the in-camera HDR can still be pretty HDR-ish, and beyond normal what-you-see-with-your-eye. These were +2 HDRs straight out of the camera:

Of course, it can be a very useful feature for just normal dynamic range stretching in challenging light and shadow situations, when you aren't going for the full fantasy look but just want to expose for extreme shadows and extreme highlights in the same shot, like this heavy shadow over the canyon area with a hugely bright noon sunny sky:

I haven't heard of Panasonics with an in-camera HDR feature as yet...but I expect it will be more and more common. If you want a quick and easy HDR without processing required, look into the Sony, Pentax, or Ricoh systems that offer it, or keep your eyes out for others with it.

 

[photo_chick]

Being possible wasn't the question.... but the particular camera the OP listed seems very careful in the manufacturers description to say it's not creating HDR images. When it describes the high dynamic mode, that doesn't describe an HDR image.

I didn't know the Pentax could do that.... one more thing to add to it's bang for the buck ratio.

I still can't see the benefit of doing it in camera. But then I can't see shooting jpeg if you have the ability to shoot RAW either and many people love shooting jpeg. I've always been a geek that gets into the process, be it in the darkroom or at the computer.

 

[sabrinadv1]

So I made the leap and bought the Fuji s1500. I know it's not the best camera on my list but, I think it is a good learning camera. I got it for $120. For Christmas maybe I will be ready to upgrade to something more advanced. I am going to try my hand at hdr. With this camera I can afford to get a better photo editing program than what I have (free online stuff). I will post pics when I get the hang of it. Thanks everyone for putting up with my rambling today .

 

[ukcatfan]

I didn't know the Pentax could do that.... one more thing to add to it's bang for the buck ratio.

I still can't see the benefit of doing it in camera. But then I can't see shooting jpeg if you have the ability to shoot RAW either and many people love shooting jpeg. I've always been a geek that gets into the process, be it in the darkroom or at the computer.

The benefit for me is that I can actually do them with my K-x. I am not a big fan of them, so would not spend the $ on the extra program to make them. I have done a few since I got the camera, but none at WDW yet. One thing to note is that it is JPG only in HDR mode and results in one file, so if you are going to want to mess with it yourself later, you will need to take the shot twice.

 

[zackiedawg]

Exactly...you said it ukcatfan. The fact that you can do them in camera makes it a fun convenience to try out sometimes for those of us not as 'into' the super-HDR look, and unwilling to buy any processing software just to have the capability. I find it very freeing and convenient that it is something I can choose to shoot, on the fly, with no planning at all, and just a single click of the shutter. While I could set up a tripod, set an EV range, fire off 3-10 shots, load them to my computer, open up HDR software, sit processing and tweaking, and eventually end up with an HDR shot - there are times when I'd rather just be walking by a scene, think to myself it might look better using HDR for expanded DR, and have to do nothing more than engage the mode with the button on top, aim, meter, and press the shutter button...no planning, no tripods, no setup, no multiple shots, no processing and tweaking.

I do split my photography between RAW and JPEG - it all depends on the needs, wants, and situation. If I know I want the optimum results, with maximum latitude for tweaking or adjusting, or absolutely need the safety of being able to correct mistakes for a one-time shot...I'll use RAW. When I just want to have fun, capture scenes, spend a little time getting it right in-camera and not having to work on it later, share photos more quickly, or just feel more relaxed and into the photography portion without being into the processing portion, I'll shoot jpeg. If you get it right, jpeg vs raw can be unidentifiable in even moderately large prints. RAW just gives much more latitude for correcting, or tweaking, or customizing...which at times is fun.

OP - congrats on the camera, and have fun! You picked a solid camera with a nice big lens, good manual controllability to learn your stuff, and a nice long-lasting battery life with lithiums or rechargeables. You should enjoy it!

 

[sabrinadv1]

Thanks! If it hadn't been for the people here on the boards, I probably would have wound up with a very expensive piece of equipment that was way over my head. I probably would have given up on it.