Mike Chaney's Tech Corner

As Fred and Terry already know I recently 'upgraded' my camera

I have for years - ever since getting Qimage - shot only in raw. Don't worry Fred I always keep my pants on  :)

Just as an experiment I took four shots in Raw+Jpeg all at 200iso but each with increasing underexposure.

The result was in Qimage all the raws looked pretty much the same, but the camera created jpegs went from OK to the last one being almost black from the under exposure.

The adjustment Qimage made appears to be in the ISO boosted area, most of the fill values being in the low numbers.

Any of the raws were better than the best jpeg.

Amazing.

Jeff

Absolutely, Jeff
The adjustments that Qimage Ultimate made to your Raw images were resetting the exposure to compensate.... adding some fill or reducing fill where needed.... and doing   it automatically. (Lowest auto fill is zero. Below that, must be manual.)
If you look closely, you can see ISO boost numbers that Mike has provided.
THIS is how your picture would look had the ISO been set to: xxxx with set exposure and lighting provided.

From this point you can change the parameters manually to suit the need.
We must remember, as smart as Qimage is, it is still not human.
Only you know what you wanted, and what was the important item to be exposed properly.
That is the reason for being able to draw an exposure box around the important subject.
Please see CHALLENGES  #33 and #34

Fred

I find the most useful feature on the Oly is the ability to see the blown areas before taking the shot and adjusting the exposure accordingly.

The Oly is harder to manage than the Pentax, but I find I have very few adjustment to make when developing the Oly shots.

Must find time to do a detailed comparison between the two cameras.

Jeff

Jeff,

I am moving to exposing with my Oly so that I almost always see a bit of the highlight flashing.

My understanding is that it is showing that the jpg will be blown - but there is still useable image info in the RAW.

By that I get less noise and I need less Fill and consequently get less contrast when inspecting the RAW image. I can then edit in more contrast.

The first batch of shots on the following folder were shot at around 2,000 ASA and the ones at the end at 6,400 ASA. The lighting was virtually unchanged. I think the 'overexposed' higher ASA shots show less noise than the lower ASA ones.

http://www.tonygamble.org/Tango_Dinner_2015/index.html

Tony

Hi Tony,
I realize this post is mainly for Jeff, but I just wanted to correct one technical assumption that you offered.

Less Fill = more contrast.
More Fill = less contrast.

Sometimes, when I need a tick brighter in an image but the contrast is just right and I don't want to lose any, I will add that tick brighter by using the Brightness control in the editor instead of the Fill on tick more.

Fred

Quite right Fred,

The reason why I prefer those 'overexposed' shots is because they needed less Fill and were consequently more contrasty.

And the 'correctly exposed' shots needed more fill and the extra contrast from within Edit. So I am adding contrast to what is already a noisier image.

Well spotted - and so early in the morning for you New Worlders!

Tony

I saw that Tango dancer in the red dress, and I was awake!!!
Wait til Jeff sees her!
He will be awake and grab his Oly too.
Fred

I was awake and up at 0600gmt :)

I go a bundle on Tango dancers in red dresses especially if they have got lovely bottoms as in this one-   :) :) taken at San Sebastian
A tad on the dark side, a 2010 image, I will reprocess some time.

Jeff

Jeff

Hi Tony & Jeff,
The interior shots here ..
https://www.flickr.com/photos/terry-m_flickrphotos/sets/72157649228048907/ (https://www.flickr.com/photos/terry-m_flickrphotos/sets/72157649228048907/)
.. were taken at 3200 ISO with my modest Canon 600D. QU "pushed" to values between 5000 & 8000iso.
Click the thumb and then the arrows at top right of the screen to get a full screen view. You can see noise is well under control, helped by Medium or Ultra-L noise reduction in the editor.
I have now started to use Auto ISO on my camera with Aperture priority. I previously normally used Aperture priority but set the ISO manually  to get useable shutter speeds when hand held. With Auto ISO and AP, the Canon sets the shutter speed as if there was no lens stabilization. It all works very well.
Terry

Thanks Terry

I have made a note of that approach, I will try it out and see what happens on my Oly.

You have some great shots.

This is the best I can do

http://jmila4.wix.com/ejdigitalimages

Jeff

I have made a note of that approach, I will try it out and see what happens on my Oly.

I have just tried that with my EM5. Taking some shots in my living room I find I can up the exposure compensation to at least one stop. Often it will take 1.5 before any blowing starts to show. I am sure this is the recipe for keeping noise down.

Tony

I have had a go at setting the Oly  to AP / Auto ISO

A bit of a nightmare, it appears to default to iso 200 most of time, I have probably got that set as a preference somewhere.

Will see how it goes.

Jeff

Hi Jeff,
Try reading the manual  ;D
Try different apertures with the same scene, wider should allow you to go down to 100iso - and visa versa.
The Canon has no minimum setting but the maximum can be set - mine is 3200iso.
Terry

Try reading the manual??  The first job on getting the camera was to  print out the the manual. It proved to be 164 pages of uselessness. :) :) :)
The first thing I wanted was to set camera to Raw.  I could not find a mention in the manual!! yesterday it took over half an hour to get it off Raw + jpg
I'm afraid it is not as simple as reading the manual.
 
I got a email book on the camera - much better.

Jeff


 

ISO-Auto Set

Page 88 Jeff.

Tony

Jeff,

http://www.tonygamble.org/Arabella_Dorman_web/index.html

All last night's shots were using Auto and Auto ISO with never less than an aperture of extra exposure. Lots were 1.3.

Nothing blown apart from the Apple on the lady's computer - and that not often.

So I have masses of shadow detail and if I need the screen image behind her I reconvert the RAW with much less fill and combine the two jpgs with Picture Window Pro.

Tony