Soft highlight + shadow VS DR 200 400?

Started Nov 25, 2013 | Questions thread
(unknown member) Contributing Member • Posts: 500
Re: Soft highlight + shadow VS DR 200 400?

CAcreeks wrote:

Has anyone investigated the cameras (X10, X10, XF1, XS1, HSnn) that have a setting for highlight and shadow treatment (soft means more detail) to see how well it works compared to DR 200 + 400?

My interpretation of "soft" is not "more detail", but "greater dynamic range in the JPG", "more color retained in JPG", or "smoother tone curve," something to that effect. In fact, I tend to use them with DR 200, 400, etc. to obtain a more pleasing JPG. I suppose that can mean more detail, but I think of it as recovering blocked shadows and blown highlights in the resulting JPG. I frequently apply this on the X10, either when there's a backlit or when the contrast is high.

I might not be describing the effect correctly, having discovered it on my own, & finding the effect pleasing in certain situations. In all the talk about sizes & DR, I don't recall anyone talking about this (recently). Well, except myself in one thread, but no one seemed to pay attention then.

I might be able to provide an example of what I mean later, but I'm at work now, don't know when I'll be able to get my hands on the computer I can use for these things (kids at home all week), & besides, you can test it yourself in a fairly high contrast situation. (Upon edit:) Though, not too high contrast. This is a genuinely software DR tool, used in processing only. You can't recover data that's lost even in the Raw files.

selected answer This post was selected as the answer by the original poster.
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow