PDA

View Full Version : 1DS MKIII sample image


Paul Bestwick
December 10th, 2007, 06:45 PM
This is a shot taken at a wedding on Saturday. I found a location with filtered light which was perfect for setting up a few family shots.
The detail is amazing.

1/200 sec @ f5.6. 24-70 2.8L 100 iso (no adjustments in ACR & no ps work)

http://www.studio58.com.au/OPF/1DSMK3a.jpg

Bart_van_der_Wolf
December 11th, 2007, 03:37 AM
The detail is amazing.

Hi Paul,

It looks like you are having some 'serious fun' with the new workhorse. Talking about detail, I've seen many comments about the different/improved image qualities of the 1Ds3 on the various web fora and blogs regarding the AA-filter. Some state, without seroius testing, that the AA-filter is 'stronger', others state it is 'weaker', and anything in between.

Since you come across a lot of different types of fabric in your shots, like the groom's jacket in the image above, what is your impression about the sensitivity to moiré in practice sofar? Did it ever bite you in the past with your 1Ds2, and have you encountered it with the new camera?

Bart

Nicolas Claris
December 12th, 2007, 08:16 AM
I've seen many comments about the different/improved image qualities of the 1Ds3 on the various web fora and blogs regarding the AA-filter. Some state, without seroius testing, that the AA-filter is 'stronger', others state it is 'weaker', and anything in between.

Bonjour Bart

I think there is a main reason about all these differents comments we read or hear…

If we forget the photog skills, the lens and the conditions of shooting, in the real world the "problem" is the raw converter used. I have been really amazed by the superb quality of the incamera jpegs…

The RC that accepts the 1DS3 files, on Mac, are, by inverse order of good rendering:

LR
ACR
DPP
C1 beta2 (I really await for C1 pro 3.7.8 before the pro 4)
RAW Developer (very good for details) some problem with color, but I never used it before so…)
Sylkipix

There is a HUGE difference between all of these.
The good surprise is Sylkipix and RAW Developer (they do have a trial version)

I also 'tried to try' Bibble but had a magnificent crash when I tried to open it and got time to uninstall/reinstall
After having checked on Bibble website, Bibble 4.9 is not supporting (yet) the 1Ds3…

I think there is still a lot of improvement, and certainly with moiré (which I haven't encountered yet).

Let's keep in mind that beside DPP the other companies haven't got a lot of time, for now, to develop their tool for the specific files of the 1Ds3 (I guess it is the same for the new Nikons)

So I suggest that any comments here about IQ do mention which raw converter were used.
I strongly beleive that there is a strong relationship between camera body/PPer/Raw Converter…

Nicolas Claris
December 12th, 2007, 08:29 AM
Hi Paul

May I suggest you, for your next shoot, to tell the bride not to wear sunglasses!

Seriously, it would be interesting to know what RC you used and if you could post some 100% crop of the flower and of some canvas so we can see if you got some moiré…

Thanks for sharing, no Europe sick?

Ralph Eisenberg
December 12th, 2007, 12:56 PM
Thanks Paul for posting the interesting sample.

Nicolas, your point is certainly well-taken (both in regard to the Raw converter used and the degree of experience with a specific converter) and it is worthwhile underscoring it once again as you do. I do think that DPP, if one forgets its workflow (that one would wish on one's worst enemy), should be able to eke out the detail of a 1Ds3 file, as heretofore it has been unsurprisingly recognized to do for Canon Raw files. (They do have inside information with respect to what's under the hood, at least I should hope so). Raw Developer also has had this reputation for 1Ds2 files. What is interesting are the results that you are getting with Sylkipix. I guess that we shall have to wait to evaluate this new camera until its files are fully supported by the major Raw converters and its users become more accustomed to the camera and the processing of its files.

Joseph A. Kurkjian
December 15th, 2007, 07:47 PM
Bonjour Bart

I think there is a main reason about all these differents comments we read or hear…

If we forget the photog skills, the lens and the conditions of shooting, in the real world the "problem" is the raw converter used. I have been really amazed by the superb quality of the incamera jpegs…

The RC that accepts the 1DS3 files, on Mac, are, by inverse order of good rendering:

LR
ACR
DPP
C1 beta2 (I really await for C1 pro 3.7.8 before the pro 4)
RAW Developer (very good for details) some problem with color, but I never used it before so…)
Sylkipix

There is a HUGE difference between all of these.
The good surprise is Sylkipix and RAW Developer (they do have a trial version)

I also 'tried to try' Bibble but had a magnificent crash when I tried to open it and got time to uninstall/reinstall
After having checked on Bibble website, Bibble 4.9 is not supporting (yet) the 1Ds3…

I think there is still a lot of improvement, and certainly with moiré (which I haven't encountered yet).

Let's keep in mind that beside DPP the other companies haven't got a lot of time, for now, to develop their tool for the specific files of the 1Ds3 (I guess it is the same for the new Nikons)

So I suggest that any comments here about IQ do mention which raw converter were used.
I strongly beleive that there is a strong relationship between camera body/PPer/Raw Converter…

Hi Nicolas:

I've been using Silkypix for quite a while now (since RSP closed down) and have been extremely pleased with the detail extraction (which does not come at the expense of noise or moire), DR, and colors rendered by this RAW converter. My Silkypix experience (split 50-50) is limited to landscapes and wildlife (I don't shoot humans) . I should point out that I shoot a lot of feathers and good detail extraction MINUS moire artifacts is very important to me. Also, I should mention that it doesn't matter if the files were created by my 10D, 30D, 40D, or 1DmkII, Silkypix simply comes through with a great job for the genre I shoot.

My question(s) to you is how does Silkypix perform when rendering pictures of human skin? Are the colors accurate, warm, cold, or what? Note, if anybody else (e.g. portrait photographers) can contribute with answers to my question please don't hold back, the more input the better it is for all of us. Oh, here is another question - did you (or anybody else) feel "forced" to use the Fine Color Controller to get accurate human skin tones? Thanks in advance for your response.

Regards,

Joe Kurkjian

Joseph A. Kurkjian
December 15th, 2007, 07:53 PM
This is a shot taken at a wedding on Saturday. I found a location with filtered light which was perfect for setting up a few family shots.
The detail is amazing.

1/200 sec @ f5.6. 24-70 2.8L 100 iso (no adjustments in ACR & no ps work)


Paul, very nice looking colors on that shot. Thanks for showing that example. Do you have any plans to demonstrate a comparison between the 1DsIII, 1DsII, and 1DIII?

Regards,

Joe Kurkjian

Nicolas Claris
December 16th, 2007, 04:56 AM
My question(s) to you is how does Silkypix perform when rendering pictures of human skin? Are the colors accurate, warm, cold, or what? Note, if anybody else (e.g. portrait photographers) can contribute with answers to my question please don't hold back, the more input the better it is for all of us. Oh, here is another question - did you (or anybody else) feel "forced" to use the Fine Color Controller to get accurate human skin tones? Thanks in advance for your response.

Hi Joe

unfortunately, I don't shoot very much people…
I only can say that on some trial shots with the Ds3, faces (not portrait) looked less red than with the previous 1DS (and 1Ds2)… So your second question is not for me!

I have just start to learn the Sylkypix workflow, to find all the precise tunnings, so I'm not the best guy to answer you about the software.

I can only confirm after trials/tests of shots done for real assignements (industrial environment) that the files from 1Ds3 are stunning, lot of details in highlights and shadows (in the midtone to ;-).
200 ISO is noise free, in fact I discovered that working with this files requires (with all RCs) to set noise reduction (luminance and color) to 0 (ZERO) instead of 'default' and then tweak for noise. Otherwise you'll get the plastic look of files with too much noise reduction.

John_Nevill
December 16th, 2007, 05:17 AM
Hi Joe,

Nice to see you on OPF.

Your probably aware that I'm a resident Silkypix advocate (off topic, sorry Asher).

I've written an ebook and have just finalised a suite of 11 classic tastes emulating Aged Photo, Antique, Antique Light, Burnt Sepia, B&W High Contrast, Cold Tone, Cross Processed Agfa, Cross Processed Kodak, Polachrome, Cyanotype and Selenium.

Its funny, Pentax users seem to love Silkypix, yet others prefer LR (ACR) C1 etc.

As for skin tones, it has a flattering appeal, very true colours but unfortunately I find that the skin tone picker errs toward well-tanned skin tones.

I'd also be interested to see some 1DsMkIII outputs.

Ralph Eisenberg
December 16th, 2007, 05:52 AM
The question of skin tones with the 1Ds3 is also of interest to me. But I should also be interested to learn whether users who have made the upgrade from the 1Ds2 feel that for a broad range of shooting conditions and subjects it is an unquestionably worthwhile upgrade.

Nicolas Claris
December 16th, 2007, 07:10 AM
The question of skin tones with the 1Ds3 is also of interest to me. But I should also be interested to learn whether users who have made the upgrade from the 1Ds2 feel that for a broad range of shooting conditions and subjects it is an unquestionably worthwhile upgrade.

If you can afford it, buy it !

Joseph A. Kurkjian
December 16th, 2007, 08:08 AM
Hi Joe,

Your probably aware that I'm a resident Silkypix advocate (off topic, sorry Asher).



Hi John:

No, I was not aware of that. Because of your past work (EOSPIX profiles) it's nice to know an expert, and a discerning one at that, likes the same RAW converter I prefer (nice warm feeling all over). :-)

FWIW I've done a few RAW converter comparisons (detail extraction versus noise) that you may be interested in (refer to the link below).

http://www.pbase.com/jkurkjia/raw_detail_extraction_vs_noise

Let me know if any of my comparisons can be of help to you regarding the e-book; you are more than welcome to anything you want including the RAW files for my examples.

Joe

Joseph A. Kurkjian
December 16th, 2007, 08:10 AM
Hi Joe

unfortunately, I don't shoot very much people…
I only can say that on some trial shots with the Ds3, faces (not portrait) looked less red than with the previous 1DS (and 1Ds2)… So your second question is not for me!

I have just start to learn the Sylkypix workflow, to find all the precise tunnings, so I'm not the best guy to answer you about the software.

I can only confirm after trials/tests of shots done for real assignements (industrial environment) that the files from 1Ds3 are stunning, lot of details in highlights and shadows (in the midtone to ;-).
200 ISO is noise free, in fact I discovered that working with this files requires (with all RCs) to set noise reduction (luminance and color) to 0 (ZERO) instead of 'default' and then tweak for noise. Otherwise you'll get the plastic look of files with too much noise reduction.

Thanks for the feedback Nicolas!

Joe

Paul Bestwick
December 16th, 2007, 02:41 PM
Hi guys,

Joseph, I don't have the time or patience to do shots on the 3 cameras for comparison. My method is to post a shot here & there that takes my fancy & let you guys judge the shot on its merit. Having said that, I always take an interest in what the more technically inclined users have to say.

Ralph I reckon the upgrade is worthwhile. Canon stated with the MK3 release that it was a new system from the ground up. The idea of D!gic 3 processing, 14 bit colour, large screen, self cleaning had me sold.

In addition to that, the menu system & the controls are more to my liking. A few extra MP's was no real attraction given that I was already shooting with the 1DS MK2, & that was more than sufficient.
The only upgrade I regret was when I moved from my D30 to D60. I never saw much of an increase in the quality of the results I was getting.

Cory Silken
December 17th, 2007, 08:41 PM
If you can afford it, buy it !

That's good to hear! So are the Mark III photos more detailed than from the Mark II when you're hanging out the door of a helicopter flying sideways at 25kts, shooting a magayacht from 60 feet off the water with an 85mm at 1/15th at 1.2 at ISO1600 after sunset? And is the lighter weight noticeable when you've got one with a wide angle hanging around your neck, and you're shooting handheld with another with a 400mm on a 30' RIB in 30kts of breeze in a hail squall in Cannes?

In all seriousness now, Nicolas, have you taken any boat pictures with it yet? I'm interested to see the difference in fine details such as rigging, as well as how the 14 bits might make my sepia conversions cleaner.

Nicolas Claris
December 17th, 2007, 10:56 PM
Hi Cory
No not yet, two assignements (in Antigua) have been postponed to January or February due to some technical problems on both boats…
But as far as I have tried it yet with industrial shots, yes details are there… as for Sepia, can't tell, you know that's not my piece of cake (or my cup of tea?);-)

Hope to see you in March, we're coming around NYC and a wide tour around (wide to be taken as the European mean of it = small in US;-)

Are you down South right now or up under the ice?

Ralph Eisenberg
December 18th, 2007, 06:53 AM
Hi guys,
Ralph I reckon the upgrade is worthwhile. Canon stated with the MK3 release that it was a new system from the ground up. The idea of D!gic 3 processing, 14 bit colour, large screen, self cleaning had me sold.
.

Thanks Paul and Nicolas for your replies. But in actuality are you, for instance, seeing these enhancements expressed in the way the camera handles tonal and color gradations? Has there been an effective real-world improvement in the AWB (even for those who shoot in Raw as I do, it is nice to know that you are in the appropriate color ballpark)? Do you like the files that you are getting out of the camera for your respective uses? or, while liking them, sigh with all the PP that awaits you.

Nicolas Claris
December 18th, 2007, 07:08 AM
Bonjour ralph
I think I wrote it already, but yes the quality is there, for me the in camera WB is verygood, for now the PP needed is a lot of trials to test the best RC -for now-.

Today I have intensively worked on the same file (industrial shot made last week) with:
Bibble (still abeta but very stable)
C1B4.2
Bibble
Sylkipix
ACR
The problem is that they all have some advantage over the other one, but never for the same reason!

The WB is almost the same in everyone (except C1 that, already said, you have to set manually)

CIB4.2 handles highlight recovery and CA almost perfectly
Bibble extract the best details/gradient ratio
Sylkipix very slightly behind the 2 others…
ACR way behind…

Now I suggest, as you are in Paris to try to get one for a test, even just shoot the Canon guy an the workshop… and go back to the office for your own tests!

Ralph Eisenberg
December 18th, 2007, 09:48 AM
Bonjour ralph

Now I suggest, as you are in Paris to try to get one for a test, even just shoot the Canon guy an the workshop… and go back to the office for your own tests!

Bonjour Nicolas,

Meilleurs voeux pour les fêtes!!
It is always better to have good shooters like Paul and yourself do the testing !!! And besides, you know how the story ends when one has a fine camera in hand.... the hand goes to the pocket and the pocket has too many holes in it already.

Nicolas Claris
December 18th, 2007, 09:58 AM
the hand goes to the pocket and the pocket has too many holes in it already.

Ha! LoL Ralph, a good receipe: put some urchins in your pocket !

a good saver… <:O>)

Nicolas Claris
December 19th, 2007, 12:06 PM
This was yesterday, tonight, Capture One 4 has been launched, and beleive me, they've done a very good job!
Perfect WB, handles DNG etc…

CI 4 is now on top of my list…

Today I have intensively worked on the same file (industrial shot made last week) with:
Bibble (still abeta but very stable)
C1B4.2
Bibble
Sylkipix
ACR
The problem is that they all have some advantage over the other one, but never for the same reason!

The WB is almost the same in everyone (except C1 that, already said, you have to set manually)

CIB4.2 handles highlight recovery and CA almost perfectly
Bibble extract the best details/gradient ratio
Sylkipix very slightly behind the 2 others…
ACR way behind…

I have no relation with Phaseone just being a user of the software for longtime, to be honest, I may say that I know earlier versions and V4 beta quite well and it is easier for me to immediately find the right settings that fit my tastes and needs.

I wish to add that Sylkipix and Bibble do very good job too, just a little under for MY taste, it may be different for others…

Ralph Eisenberg
December 19th, 2007, 02:20 PM
Very good news. Do you miss Magne's profiles?? I have found that they appear to make a difference with 1Ds2 files in Capture One 4.

A bit brain dead here. It took a while for me to register the wisdom of your remark about stuffing sea-urchins preventively in one's pocket. Great advice.

Nicolas Claris
December 19th, 2007, 02:32 PM
Hi Ralph
Do you miss Magne's profiles?honestly, not really, but I would maybe buy them if they come out one day…

stuffing sea-urchins preventively in one's pocket. Great advice. well be carefull, sometimes it hurts!

Bart_van_der_Wolf
December 20th, 2007, 06:10 AM
CIB4.2 handles highlight recovery and CA almost perfectly

While you probably base your evaluation on your 1Ds3 (or did you revisit some previous 1Ds2 Raws?), I find that the highlight 'recovery' (pulling exposure) renders pink highlights on my 1Ds2 conversions.

I'm much less impressed about that, compared to ACR4's performance in keeping a neutral tone, which is phenomenal. ACR4 highlight recovery does make the highlights murky, and CO4 (official release) adjusts tonality in a more pleasing way (but doesn't change the pink much).

Overall (automatic) CA reduction works fine, but when CA becomes too much, one is stuck with colored edges. I'd have prefered to have manual control over the degree of reduction, even if only for damage control in bad cases, now I'm forced to also use another tool to tackle it.

Bart

Nicolas Claris
December 20th, 2007, 08:17 AM
Hi Bart
The highlight recovery is a bit "tricky" in C1 4
You have to balance beewteen Highlight slider and exposure slider (to down) to find the right setting to avoid that pink color (it does exist too in C1 3.7)

I agree on CA reduction (auto) but for the same pic between all RCs I tested, C1 delivers the best result… (check it with the last Ds3 file I did send you)

Ralph Eisenberg
December 20th, 2007, 03:29 PM
Using Capture One 4 on 1Ds2 files, I haven't been bedeviled by the problem you mention of a color cast to the highlights following highlight recovery. I also have found that Magne's Lo Sat profile works much better than the generic, and gives a broader dynamic range. They seem to have jacked up the tone curve for some reason in this version, with the result that you get Highlight and Shadow clipping warnings that do not appear in C1 Pro v3.7.7 for the same file. I hope the new Pro version will have little resemblance to the Lt version, and that it will finally be graced with a true point-Curves tool comparable to that obtaining in ACR 4, which allows you to surmount the murkiness of the otherwise excellent highlight recovery in that converter. My .02

Nicolas Claris
December 21st, 2007, 03:26 AM
Did I say The highlight recovery is a bit "tricky" in C1 4 ?

One must be very, very carefull on what tool (exposure/HDR/levels/curve and combination of the above to achive the best results… Here, one must have an eye on the histogram and the other eye on the image…

We have there a very powerfull -hence 'dangerous'- tool…

Bart_van_der_Wolf
December 21st, 2007, 06:22 AM
Using Capture One 4 on 1Ds2 files, I haven't been bedeviled by the problem you mention of a color cast to the highlights following highlight recovery.

This is what I'm talking about (1Ds2 Raws), seems hard to miss:
CaptureOne V.4.0
http://www.xs4all.nl/~bvdwolf/temp/OPF/5653-6_CO40_Crop.jpg

Adobe Camera Raw V.4.31
http://www.xs4all.nl/~bvdwolf/temp/OPF/5653-6_ACR431_Crop.jpg

The image crop on the left was marginally underexposed (2 sec. f/9), and the crop at the right was overexposed (5 sec. f/9), as two exposures in a 7 exposure bracketed HDR sequence. The only difference between the left/right crops is Exposure correction in Raw conversion. In C1-4 it didn't matter if I used the Dynamic Range Highlight adjustment, it only changed tonality, not color.

Also notice the insufficient auto CA correction in C1-4 resulting in green residual fringes, whereas ACR had no problem in removing them from the same Raw files. The problem with C1-4 is that the CA is partially corrected, so subsequent processing will not be able to remove the green fringes without showing red fringes. If it had been possible to deactivate or control CA reduction manually, then it could have been reduced in other software.

Bart

Ralph Eisenberg
December 21st, 2007, 02:30 PM
It certainly is hard to miss from the example you adduce. Have you sent these files to Phase One?

Bart_van_der_Wolf
December 21st, 2007, 03:34 PM
Have you sent these files to Phase One?

Not yet, but I find it hard to believe I'm the only/first one to experience it. Guess I'll try to contact PhaseOne, but I first have to pick up my 1Ds Mark III (I received a call that there is one waiting for me).

Bart

Michael Fontana
December 21st, 2007, 04:14 PM
Bart

I don't have that pinkish cast, with 1 Ds-2-files as well. Using Magne's Hi-Sat-Profile.
The shot was done at + 1.5 f, in PS, it says 255/255/255, after conversion...

C1 4.0- 14154.14152

Nice rendering of the shadows and 3/4-tones, as alwith with C1.

Colleen Vermillion
December 21st, 2007, 04:26 PM
That pinkish cast is probably dependent on the camera model and may vary with white balance and compression mode. It is almost always caused by the red and blue channels having more information in the highlights than the green and the clip point being set higher than the top of the green range. Does C1 give you some sort of threshold or sensitivity control for the highlight recovery? If you can nudge the clip point, it should solve your problem.

-Colleen

Michael Fontana
December 21st, 2007, 04:35 PM
I tried another one, shot: + 1.5f as well; exposure -1 f, Highlights 100...
no magenta... - same cam as Bart....

Ralph Eisenberg
December 22nd, 2007, 12:11 AM
Not yet, but I find it hard to believe I'm the only/first one to experience it. Guess I'll try to contact PhaseOne, but I first have to pick up my 1Ds Mark III (I received a call that there is one waiting for me).

Bart

Insofar as the quality of a camera file is dependent on the Raw converter which instantiates it for us, I would certainly try to get Phase One onto these issues by sending them these files. And try to shake Magne's tree so that he makes some of his great profiles for the 1Ds3, which I hope gives you a lot of shooting satisfaction. I tried to do this via Michael Tapes, as I'd read somewhere that they had a joint project of some kind underway (I'd found no contact info on Magne's site). Given Michael Fontana's observations which converge with mine (although I'd have more confidence in the former), it would seem important - certainly for users like myself - to have access to Magne's profiles for a Canon camera body, at least when using C1.

By the way, the crops you provided must have come from some very lovely files (if you will forgive an off-topic comment).

Michael Fontana
December 22nd, 2007, 07:18 AM
I could reproduce the pink in C1-4, now:

http://imago.macbay.de/OPF/C1/pink-cast_C1_4.jpg

Look at the histogramm, of that RAW:

http://imago.macbay.de/OPF/C1/hist.jpg


quickanddirtcomparison to LR:

http://imago.macbay.de/OPF/C1/pinkcast_LR.jpg

and finally RD (Raw Developer) but not to much underexposing in the converter, as the other ones:

http://imago.macbay.de/OPF/C1/pink-cast_RD.jpg

Yes, I belive LR can recover better the highlights than C1-4, but it has its limits as well.

IMO, C1 has its merits in °well-structured° shadows-3/4 tones, in sunlight.
When shooting art in the studio, with strobes, I like RD most.

Basically, I think each RC has its pro's and cons, which makes me using thes 3 RC's.

When testing C-1- 4, yesterday, I found it hard to set/judge the sharpening; in the previews it looked less sharp, than as a developed tiff, in PS, later.

Nicolas Claris
December 22nd, 2007, 07:41 AM
Basically, I think each RC has its pro's and cons, which makes me using thes 3 RC's.

When testing C-1- 4, yesterday, I found it hard to set/judge the sharpening; in the previews it looked less sharp, than as a developed tiff, in PS, later.

Bonjour Michael

a wise statement!

for the sharpening, I use the default settings and to end the PP, I run… you know what!

Paul Caldwell
December 22nd, 2007, 02:07 PM
Bart,

I found that same problem with 3.7 etc. On my 1ds MKII files it was very common in clouds. The same raw files would open up in other raw converts without the same effect. I started using ACR CS2 because of this issue. As I wrote it off to my in experience with the MKII but after a while I just realized that Capture One 3.7.6 Pro was very very tight with certain highlights. Interesting to see that same problem has come up in Capture 4.

Paul Caldwell

Bart_van_der_Wolf
December 22nd, 2007, 07:00 PM
By the way, the crops you provided must have come from some very lovely files (if you will forgive an off-topic comment).

To give you an impression of this partial panorama tile:
http://www.xs4all.nl/~bvdwolf/temp/OPF/5656.jpg

The crops are from the center top area, hence the CA almost being at it's worst from my TS-E 45mm f/2.8 lens (tilted for extreme DOF).

Bart

Nicolas Claris
December 23rd, 2007, 03:19 AM
I was a bit surprised by the results Bart got, so I asked him the raw file, and he send me the one "over exposed".
At first I got almost same result in C1-4 and it took me a while to understand that C1-4 did "understand" these green and red casts as… color noise!
Then: 100% crop direct JPEG export. No PS, No CS, no PP:

http://mnclaris.free.fr/forum/UZ4W5653_NC.jpg


http://www.xs4all.nl/~bvdwolf/temp/OPF/5653-6_CO40_Crop.jpg

Adobe Camera Raw V.4.31
http://www.xs4all.nl/~bvdwolf/temp/OPF/5653-6_ACR431_Crop.jpg

I've seen from the exif that it was shot as ISO 50. This confirms my initial tests with the 1DS2 stating that ISO 50 in a high contrast secene does burn the highlights.

One can obviously say that ACR does bring these highlights better… but I still prefer the tones given by C1…

Michael Fontana
December 23rd, 2007, 04:39 AM
Bonjour Nicolas

I went back and redid the sky with Raw Developer; using - still in the RAW-pipeline - the Lightnesscurve in the LAB-space; this option is AFAIK unique to RD:

http://imago.macbay.de/OPF/C1/RD_LAB_tweaks.jpg

My question now:
does the wider gamut of LAB prevents the highlights to clip?
Opend in PS, the RGB's are about 216/216/241.

Bart_van_der_Wolf
December 23rd, 2007, 04:53 AM
I was a bit surprised by the results Bart got, so I asked him the raw file, and he send me the one "over exposed".
At first I got almost same result in C1-4 and it took me a while to understand that C1-4 did "understand" these green and red casts as… color noise!

Hi Nicolas,

While the amount of pink is reduced, it's still present. Besides, an ISO L shot should not need noise reduction, and I indeed had it set to zero on my C1 and ACR conversions. Interesting thing is that it seems to have helped the auto CA reduction, hmmm, strange.

I've seen from the exif that it was shot as ISO 50. This confirms my initial tests with the 1DS2 stating that ISO 50 in a high contrast secene does burn the highlights.

I have to disagree with that conclusion. As you can expect from me, I tested the differences between ISO 'L' and 100 on my 1Ds2. ISO 'L' is acually something like ISO 75 so the built in camera metering, which uses ISO 50, will overexpose by 50% which in turn is what will lead to highlight clipping compared to ISO 100 metering. In fact, ISO 'L' has a slightly higher dynamic range mainly due to lower noise levels, compared to ISO 100. Exposure "to the right" (ETTR), and watching for the blinking clipping indicator on the LCD will avoid the issue and improve image quality.

One can obviously say that ACR does bring these highlights better… but I still prefer the tones given by C1…

Sigh, yes. That's why we unfortunately need multiple Raw converters.

Bart

Nicolas Claris
December 24th, 2007, 06:11 AM
BTW what a lens!

Posted thru iphone in high speed train between Bordeaux and Paris...

Hi Nicolas,

While the amount of pink is reduced, it's still present. Besides, an ISO L shot should not need noise reduction, and I indeed had it set to zero on my C1 and ACR conversions. Interesting thing is that it seems to have helped the auto CA reduction, hmmm, strange.



I have to disagree with that conclusion. As you can expect from me, I tested the differences between ISO 'L' and 100 on my 1Ds2. ISO 'L' is acually something like ISO 75 so the built in camera metering, which uses ISO 50, will overexpose by 50% which in turn is what will lead to highlight clipping compared to ISO 100 metering. In fact, ISO 'L' has a slightly higher dynamic range mainly due to lower noise levels, compared to ISO 100. Exposure "to the right" (ETTR), and watching for the blinking clipping indicator on the LCD will avoid the issue and improve image quality.



Sigh, yes. That's why we unfortunately need multiple Raw converters.

Bart

Ralph Eisenberg
January 2nd, 2008, 09:50 AM
Hello Bart,

Thanks for posting the uncropped image which I was able to view and appreciate on my return to Paris. Now if you and Nicolas would stop praising the 1Ds3 I might be able to stick to my New Year's resolution of waiting till Feb to see what is coming.

All the best to everyone for the New Year.

Nicolas Claris
January 2nd, 2008, 10:29 AM
Now if you and Nicolas would stop praising the 1Ds3 I might be able to stick to my New Year's resolution of waiting till Feb to see what is coming.

Bonsoir Ralph

Ok. Just one more sample (ISO 1600, wide open):
http://www.openphotographyforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4743
and
http://www.openphotographyforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=41021&postcount=60

Happy new year to you too (BTW New Year has begun already, why wait Feb ?-)

Bart_van_der_Wolf
January 2nd, 2008, 10:33 AM
Hello Bart,

Thanks for posting the uncropped image which I was able to view and appreciate on my return to Paris. Now if you and Nicolas would stop praising the 1Ds3 I might be able to stick to my New Year's resolution of waiting till Feb to see what is coming.

LOL, but the image I posted was from the 1Ds2 ! Not to add to the temptations, but I think Nicolas has one on offer ;-), and maybe I will also sell my Mark II (will have it serviced before I do).

Bart

Ralph Eisenberg
January 2nd, 2008, 11:27 PM
Hello Bart,

I'm aware that it was a Ds2 shot. But independently of this both you and Nicolas have been singing the praises of your recently acquired Ds3 bodies, an upgrade from the Ds2 that I've been ambivalent about and hesitated pursuing.