Active-D Lighting Raw vs. Jpeg

[Plus24]

I have heard that Active-D Lighting (ADR) works only in Jpeg. It does nothing for a RAW file.

My question is whether it has a negative effect upon a RAW file if it is left ON. Sometimes I shoot Jpeg and want to use the Active-D Lighting. However, I usually shoot RAW where Active-D Lighting is not used.

Can I just leave Active-D lighting on so that when I shoot Jpeg it takes effect, but if I switch to RAW having it still in ON will have no effect upon my RAW files?

Thanks for any help on this.

 

[Hibiki Rush]

It will affect the metering, so if you don't shoot in manual I would take that into consideration.

 

[j_photo]

It sometimes adjusts exposure. If you later process the raw file in Nikon's own software, the software will compensate accordingly. Other raw processors will not.

 

[InTheMist]

It sometimes adjusts exposure. If you later process the raw file in Nikon's own software, the software will compensate accordingly. Other raw processors will not.

I agree wht j_photo. This seems to be what it does.

 

[chuhsi]

this is unfortunately true. so if you use lightroom, keep it off and have not-as-nice jpgs out of the camera.

 

[rubank]

this is unfortunately true. so if you use lightroom, keep it off and have not-as-nice jpgs out of the camera.

Whether true is debateable. I know this is the general saying, but I have not seen any evidence to make it fact.

I have tried to reproduce this effect, but have sofar not succeeded.
It may be that it is linked to the use of matrix metering, while I mostly use center-weighted. If so the solution is simple: don´t use matrix metering.

 

[romfordbluenose]

What I am about to say is my view and I can't prove it one way or another.

Historically active d-lighting lowered the metering and underexposed slightly to allow active d-lighting to recover the shadows and protect the highlights. This under exposure was quite apparent when compared with non d-lighting shots.

On my D800 especially in high DR shots, even more so in bright sunlight. I find the D800 exposes to protect the highlights as a matter of course. So I believe the difference in exposure is now not so pronounced as it was in older cameras. This does mean that I need to PP the raw files to bring out the shadows more often but of course bringing out the shadows on a D800 is a great experience compared to older cameras.

I would also say that d-lighting will also produce better pictures on newer cameras due to the improved DR, but again I don't use it so can't confirm this.

 

[blackwiggle]

As a new D800e owner, I have my camera set up for 14 bit RAW capture only.

I did a few test shots of one subject with a high contrast daylight situation, which is where D-Lighting is supposed to be working it's magic.

Sure there is a difference when viewing the two photos [one standard metering, the second taken with D-metering] via the camera, as the viewing you see on the cameras back is JPEG, not RAW.

Viewing the same RAW images side by side in Lightroom 4 shows little, if any difference immediately, it's only when comparing the histograms that you are alerted to the differences, well in this case, maybe a subject that had a even higher contrast between shadows and highlights would of been more immediately obvious to me.

When I compared the histograms between the two, the D lighted photo seems to expose for the right [Highlights] ever so slightly, moving the whole grey scale, not just the highlights, to the right.

Sort of like a automated Zone system equivalent of extended development with a diluted developer [I suppose it would depend on if you have ever done your own film processing if you can fathom that last explanation ]

 

[dwight3]

Active D-lighting is a specialty feature. It is not designed to be on all the time. The purpose is to slightly extend the available dynamic range of the camera in situations where the scene has slightly more dynamic range than the camera could otherwise handle. Scenes with very large dynamic range are still beyond the capability of ADL to correct.

It modifies the RAW file by modifying the exposure down a bit to avoid blown highlights and applies a curve to compensate in the shadows. As a result, images taken in this mode may appear flat.

And since it's a Nikon feature, it is marked by EXIF tags that are proprietary to Nikon, so only Nikon software will recognize them. It can be "turned off" in post by Nikon software, but other brands of software (e.g. Lightroom) will not be able to deal with it. If you use something other than Capture NX you are probably better off using bracketing at the time of the shot, then applying HDR software. For one reason, you don't have to guess whether ADL will have enough dynamic range extension to fit the particular scene you're shooting.

 

[DezM]

Active D-lighting is a specialty feature. It is not designed to be on all the time. The purpose is to slightly extend the available dynamic range of the camera in situations where the scene has slightly more dynamic range than the camera could otherwise handle. Scenes with very large dynamic range are still beyond the capability of ADL to correct.

It modifies the RAW file by modifying the exposure down a bit to avoid blown highlights and applies a curve to compensate in the shadows. As a result, images taken in this mode may appear flat.

And since it's a Nikon feature, it is marked by EXIF tags that are proprietary to Nikon, so only Nikon software will recognize them. It can be "turned off" in post by Nikon software, but other brands of software (e.g. Lightroom) will not be able to deal with it. If you use something other than Capture NX you are probably better off using bracketing at the time of the shot, then applying HDR software. For one reason, you don't have to guess whether ADL will have enough dynamic range extension to fit the particular scene you're shooting.

I don't use ADL. Do you advise using it when shooting 14-bit Raw (as I always do) and batch-converting to Tif in Capture NX, in select situations.

 

[Leonard Shepherd]

I have heard that Active-D Lighting (ADR) works only in Jpeg.

You have heard part wrong. D-lighting is applied to a RAW file in the same way as a jpeg - when you open in Nikon software.

If you do not use Nikon software you loose the option to speed up processing by using the extensive camera setting options.

 

[Plus24]

Thanks to all for your responses. I did a search last night after posting for Active-D Lighting on this forum and found posts concerning the effect on raw files that you guys mentioned in your response to my post now.

I use Photoshop CS6 ACR for raw files. I almost always shoot raw but was considering playing with jpegs so I could play with the Picture Controls (Standard, Neutral, Vivid) and with Active-D lighting.

I was under the impression that both of these functions (Picture Controls and Active-D lighting) only worked on jpegs. In my original post I forgot to mention Picture Controls. Am I correct that Picture Controls does not change raw files?

A famous wedding photographer, David Ziser, shoots mainly jpegs his weddings. He is a Canon shooter but he uses the Canon equivalent of Active-D Lighting on his weddings to protect blowing out the Bride's white dress. I don't know what kind of post-processing he uses. I assume it is Photoshop.

So, am I right about Picture Controls not affecting Raw so that I can set them as I want for jpegs and not worry about changing those settings when shooting raw?

 

[j_photo]

Thanks to all for your responses. I did a search last night after posting for Active-D Lighting on this forum and found posts concerning the effect on raw files that you guys mentioned in your response to my post now.

I use Photoshop CS6 ACR for raw files. I almost always shoot raw but was considering playing with jpegs so I could play with the Picture Controls (Standard, Neutral, Vivid) and with Active-D lighting.

I was under the impression that both of these functions (Picture Controls and Active-D lighting) only worked on jpegs. In my original post I forgot to mention Picture Controls. Am I correct that Picture Controls does not change raw files?

A famous wedding photographer, David Ziser, shoots mainly jpegs his weddings. He is a Canon shooter but he uses the Canon equivalent of Active-D Lighting on his weddings to protect blowing out the Bride's white dress. I don't know what kind of post-processing he uses. I assume it is Photoshop.

So, am I right about Picture Controls not affecting Raw so that I can set them as I want for jpegs and not worry about changing those settings when shooting raw?

Right--picture controls do not affect the raw file. They are applied only to the jpg. (Nikon's post processing software can also apply them to raw files, but this is optional.)

HOWEVER, picture controls can indirectly affect your exposure in the following way: The preview image and the histogram you see on the back of the camera have been processed with the picture control. If you are adjusting exposure based on the image preview and histogram, using different picture controls could lead you to making different exposure adjustments.

For example, if you shoot the same scene with the same exposure settings, once with the Neutral pc and once with Vivid, you will get two different preview results and two different histograms. The image with vivid pc might appear to have blown highlights, which might then lead you to reduce exposure. But some or all of the apparent over-exposure may be due to the picture control and the raw file may be in better shape than the preview and histogram would lead you to believe. So it's helpful to mindful of what pc you are shooting with and how it might influence the apparent exposure. Using neutral or standard is a better indicator of the raw file exposure, but not a perfect one. Shooters who are heavily into this use a custom pc called UniWB (unitary white balance). You can search for it if you want to know more.

 

[j_photo]

this is unfortunately true. so if you use lightroom, keep it off and have not-as-nice jpgs out of the camera.

Whether true is debateable. I know this is the general saying, but I have not seen any evidence to make it fact.
I have tried to reproduce this effect, but have sofar not succeeded.
It may be that it is linked to the use of matrix metering, while I mostly use center-weighted. If so the solution is simple: don´t use matrix metering.

It's not hard to test. See the following two images. Both were shot aperture priority with auto iso. First has Active-D off, second is extra-high. The camera reduced exposure in the second image almost a full stop.


Active-D Lighting off




Active-D Lighting extra-high

 

[jean bernier]

Caution: D-Lighting does work even in manual exposure mode. What it does is it tricks the lightmeter in a similar fashion as the exposure comp, and "asks" you to readjust the aperture/shutter. The result is always an underexposure followed with a curve applied to the preview jpg contained in the raw , or to the directly-shot jpg.

The raw must be processed with a Nikon software in order to obtain the desired effect. Otherwise, an other software will only show the underexposed image whithout any adjustment curve offsetting the intentional underexposure.

Setting of High, on a D4, imposes an underexposure of 2/3 of a stop, so it is not trivial. The D-Light curve can be turned off in NX2, but the underexposure obviously cannot be reversed, (you will have to use the exposure slider in order to normalize the exposure, with added noise), just as oof shots cannot for the moment being, be focussed after the fact !

 

[Plus24]

Thanks for the info.

So, it seems that the best thing to do is turn of D-lighting and neutralize picture controls when I'm shooting raw. Turn them on as desired when shooting jpeg. Makes for more work but I'm willing to make the changes depending on whether I'm shooting raw or jpeg. Thanks, everyone for you helpful input.

 

[rubank]

Thanks for a good example.

I have had words from an expert that clarifies that ADL is linked to matrix metering.

Since I don´t use matrix, it´s no wonder I haven´t seen that effect.

(I shoot RAW only, but there´s the built-in JPG which looks nicer with ADL active).

 

[j_photo]

Thanks for a good example.

I have had words from an expert that clarifies that ADL is linked to matrix metering.

Since I don´t use matrix, it´s no wonder I haven´t seen that effect.

(I shoot RAW only, but there´s the built-in JPG which looks nicer with ADL active).

I guess that makes sense that it would only work in matrix metering. Cheers.

 

[MattiD80]

I've been shooting RAW/manual mode (and probably AD-L on, since i used on in jpegs first, and didn't think it would affect raw), and NEVER ever, I felt the camera 'forced' a wrong exposure, to get more dynamic range. I always felt like I had full control over the image. I use Spot meting, with AF-ON button. Basically 100% manual.

So I agree it would make the most sense to conclude AD-L only affects raw when using matrix metering.

 

[jean bernier]

If you set the camera on tripod, frame some high contrast scene in matrix, you'll see the difference in meter indication ( or shutter, or aperture indicated in auto exposure) if you alternate between ADL OFF and ADL Medium or High. ADL requires a manual re-adjustment of shutter/aperture if in manual exposure mode in order to center the "needle", always involving intentional underexposure. If using spot or center weighted, there is no difference in the metering .