Reading mode: Light Dark

High Dynamic mode in LX3 better than HDR compositing!

Go to last post
Hi Daniel,

Find some comments on your text below,
degger said:
Hi Ed,

I gotta say I wholeheartly disagree with your conclusion. The point of HDR is not to compress the highs and lows into the mids and punch up the saturation which clearly happened to your "High Dynamic Standard SCN capture". Instead the idea is to keep the mids, the highs and the lows where they are but bring in additional information which was not visible before due to the limited range of the sensor.
Click to expand...
In principle you are right, but screens and paper can not handle the larger amount of dynamic range, so it needs to be tone mapped. This is exactly what the LX3 is doing now.
degger said:
In your example I fail to see where the "Base exposure" lacks any highlights or shadows. Since you properly corrected exposure for the highlights to not blow out but the shadows especially on the left still have the same amount of detail (at least from what can be seen in your crops) as the "DR" versions the "Base exposure" shot looks right on spot for me. I especially don't like it when the range is compressed as much as it is in the High Dynamic mode -- let the shadows be shadows instead up knocked up mids.
Click to expand...
Using the same sensor you can not handle more light before clipping. So extending the DR can only be done at the 'dark' side of the range. That's probably the main reason why the LX3 uses iso400 in this mode. Now the HDR function will have to boast up the darker image parts (previously invisibly black) to include that image information in the 'visible' range.

If you like the shadows to be black, you need to shift the total exposure (like -1 or -2), this way you will get more DR space in the highlight area. I have read already here from 1 or 2 other users doing exactly this.
degger said:
Just for the fun of it I took a (several times heavily compressed) snapshot out of your PDF, imported it in lightroom, cranked up the fill lights (to get the compression effect you seem to enjoy), cranked up the brightness, a little bit of vibrance, a little bit of saturation, took out some contrast, boosted the saturation of the purples, the reds and the greens, et voilà c'est ça. Can't crank up the green too much as the green blocky compression artefact are amplified to much but otherwise it's pretty much there.
Click to expand...
This is more or less what tone mapping is about, but black parts will not become visible this way or will contain lots of noise. HDR is trying to prevent that by including better quality dark information (as well as light information if possible).
degger said:
I really don't appreciate the looks of this mode though. And in my personal testing I made exactly the same discoverings. Oddly the High Dynamic Mode seems to overexpose the image by default, so I happened to find out (by forgetting to turn off exposure bracketing) that by underexposing at least 1 EV that "High Dynamic" would produce images which are almost usable by having well defined shadows. Though this picture has a nasty green tint and oversaturated contrastry areas which made me like the +-0EV Raw picture a whole lot more even without retouches which are of course also much easier in the RAW version.
Click to expand...
You see HDR enthousiasts using very different tone mapping levels. I guess it´s a personal thing. I find the ´normal´ version of the LX3 HDR scene pretty conservative in that aspect.
degger said:
My conclusion: The High Dynamic mode is merely useful at special locations and only when shooting RAW is not an option. Neither of those options has anything to do with HDR though.
Click to expand...
Some initial pics I took looked promising to me. Much more dark information included in the picture, a very quick test showed me a better result as using a single non-HDR image and boost the dark part in PC software. I did not compare it yet with real multishot HDR images though.
degger said:
--
Click to expand...
Just my 2cts,
Regards,
Pat
 
exdeejjjaaaa said:
DR @ ISO400 = 8.44ev and no raw converter be it "in camera" or "off camera" can't make it more than that...
Click to expand...
I certainly do not trust those values, they seem far too high at low ISO values but in general that's one of the reasons why I never shoot above 200 ISO, typically 80.

The choice of ISO 400 for that mode seems rather odd to me.

And another thing is flawed in your sentence: There is a difference if you have clamped 8 bit/Pixelcolor JPEGs or much higher bit/Pixel RAW files.

--

Servus, Daniel
 
degger said:
degger said:
DR @ ISO400 = 8.44ev and no raw converter be it "in camera" or "off camera" can't make it more than that...
Click to expand...
I certainly do not trust those values, they seem far too high at low ISO values but in general that's one of the reasons why I never shoot above 200 ISO, typically 80.
Click to expand...
that is the maximum that they can get in a lab, we are not talking about your everyday picture...
degger said:
The choice of ISO 400 for that mode seems rather odd to me.
Click to expand...
well, typically what the camera manufacturers all do in such "high dynamic" modes they show you one ISO and internally take picture @ ISO setting one (or may be more than one in case of Panasonic) stop less... technically as it was said many times it is the same as you are shooting w/o using any fancy "High Dynamic" modes at that lower, actual ISO but using exposure compensation = -1 (or more) stop w/o and then boost it back in raw conversion... and then in Panasonic case you will have a raw file also, unlike no raw file w/ "High Dynamic mode"... the question is why they did not select ISO 200 for that mode ? well may be their sensor need to use more than one stop behind the scenes, may be they are actually playing it supersafe and use ISO100 (which is like you are shooting @ ISO100 with exposure compensation = -2 and then making it up in raw conversion)

in any case HDR approach will allow you to capture scenes w/ more DR than any single shot possibly can.

--

 
Hi Pat,
patLum said:
In principle you are right, but screens and paper can not handle the larger amount of dynamic range, so it needs to be tone mapped.
Click to expand...
I agree.
patLum said:
This is exactly what the LX3 is doing now.
Click to expand...
I don't agree here. I have not seen any "High Dynamic" shot (including the 50 or so I took on my own) where the shadows were were stretched slightly to emphasize the details within which would have otherwise been buried in the 8bit clipping of JPEG.

Instead all of the shadows from those shots have been moved/mapped into the mids, in most cases so strongly that no real shadows can't be observed anymore.
patLum said:
If you like the shadows to be black, you need to shift the total exposure (like -1 or -2), this way you will get more DR space in the highlight area. I have read already here from 1 or 2 other users doing exactly this.
Click to expand...
Indeed, most of my shots are slightly underexposed. Not because I love black so much but because I know that the sensor can capture much more detail in dark areas than very bright areas and since my pictures usually contain a very large range.
patLum said:
This is more or less what tone mapping is about, but black parts will not become visible this way or will contain lots of noise. HDR is trying to prevent that by including better quality dark information (as well as light information if possible).
Click to expand...
I know, but I still think that the High Dynamic is actually a misnomer. Compressed Dynamic or Shadow Mapper sounds much more like it.

And what's with all the tint? It looks to me like the High Dynamic Mode chooses a random color from the shot and saturates it as much as possible. That's why my sister looks Redish in the one shot I posted here while the Lawn is absurdedly green, while the Porch shot from Ed seems to have Cyan, Green and Magenta boosted (except of course the Porch is really painted in that, let's say uncommon, colour).
patLum said:
You see HDR enthousiasts using very different tone mapping levels. I guess it´s a personal thing. I find the ´normal´ version of the LX3 HDR scene pretty conservative in that aspect.
Click to expand...
Mind posting a good shot? I'd really like to see this mode producing something desirable.
patLum said:
Some initial pics I took looked promising to me. Much more dark information included in the picture, a very quick test showed me a better result as using a single non-HDR image and boost the dark part in PC software. I did not compare it yet with real multishot HDR images though.
Click to expand...
Did you shoot RAW or JPEG?

--

Regards, Daniel
 
I haven't read all of the posts here yet, but based on the original poster's pdf... I went ahead and ran the flawed firmware update so that I could try this out for myself.

First of all, I'm not one who really got into the HDR craze. Most of it looked nifty at first, but became WAAAAAAYYYYYY over done and boring IMO. Just an aesthetic preference, but I thought most of the HDR stuff I saw looked far too synthetic and cartoonish. If you like that look... more power to you. I thought it got very tired looking and way overused.

This High Dynamic setting on the LX3 looks much more natural to me... and FAR more useful. Just enough to display closer to what the eye sees, but not so much that it looks cartoonish. I think Panasonic really got this one right! I wish I could use the setting at ISO80 though.

Also... it's amazing at how much closer the macro focusing works now with the 2.0 firmware upgrade! So glad I decided to go ahead and update. :-)

--
Skip Hunt
Austin, Texas
  • visit @
http://twitter.com/skiphunt
http://skiphunt.carbonmade.com
http://skiphuntvagabond.tumblr.com
http://www.skiphuntphotography.com
http://skiphuntphotography.tumblr.com
 
exdeejjjaaaa said:
in any case HDR approach will allow you to capture scenes w/ more DR than any single shot possibly can.
Click to expand...
This is it.
If, there is indeed a magic, then with HDR there will be double magic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top