D7000's dynamic range in the highlights

[eNo]

As some of you may know, one strategy to protect highlights in digital photography is to place them in zone 7. The following article tries to answer the question of whether the D7000's additional DR allows further exposure of the whites into zone 8 or 9 with full recovery of highlight detail. For reference, D7000 capability is compared with that of the D300's:

http://imagesbyeduardo.com/main/?p=2973
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Seeking the heart and spirit in each image



Gallery and blog: http://imagesbyeduardo.com
Flickr stream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/22061657@N03

 

[binary_eye]

Any chance you could post the raw file for the last shot (D7000, two stops over)?

The blue cast is likely coming from the raw conversion rather than the overexposure of the scene.

 

[eNo]

Any chance you could post the raw file for the last shot (D7000, two stops over)?

The blue cast is likely coming from the raw conversion rather than the overexposure of the scene.

Oh, I know it is. ViewNX really twists colors when you do heavy corrections, especially if you combine negative compensation with heavy shadow protection. FWIW, I white-balanced each trio of shots against that gray card under the white jar, using the correctly exposed frame as the reference for each camera.

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Seeking the heart and spirit in each image



Gallery and blog: http://imagesbyeduardo.com
Flickr stream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/22061657@N03

 

[The Big One]

From my experience, the D7000 handles shadows much better than highlights. I find zone 7 is a good bet for highlights; however, the nice thing with the 7000 is that after placing highlights in zone 7, I can still get decent detail and little noise from zones 1 or 2, at least if I am shooting at a low ISO.

Cheers
--
--Wyatt
http://photos.digitalcave.ca
All images (c) unless otherwise specified, please ask me before editing.

 

[Robert Palmqvist]

Thanks eNo for taking the time to setup this test (that I have been to lazy to setup myself). So what you say is basically to keep highlights in zone VII or VIII and enjoy increased shadow details compared to cameras with less DR. It almost sounds like a slight shift towards "exposure to the left" for the D7000 if it's increased DR is equally distributed on both sides of zone V...

 

[ELOJR]

Silly question: I understand the Zone System as it refers to tone range within an image. What I don't understand is how to determine which zone highlights are placed in (as noted in the posted test).

Can you point me to a good article/site or - if it's simple - post a how-to.

Thanks.

 

[Steve Bingham]

All DSLR sensors are linear. That is, most information is contained in the brightest areas. The least in the darkest areas. That's why noise first appears in the darkest areas. With raw capture it is not as bad as with JPEG capture, since with raw what you care about is clipping in the native camera color space, rather than in the working RGB space (since conversion to working space happens after the raw converter's tone adjustments). Lots of colors clip in sRGB or even Adobe RGB that don't clip in camera native space.

Let me quote Ian Lyons: get your histogram as close to the right side as possible but not so close as to cause the over exposure indicator to flash. The ideal exposure ensures that you have maximum number of levels describing your image without loosing important detail in the highlights. The closer you get to this ideal then the more of those levels are being used to describe your shadows. If you underexpose an image to the extent that the shadows block, which is often what folk do to protect their highlights; then you will need to open them again to ensure the final image is as you require. The problem with this approach is that we only have 128 levels available to the shadows. You start pulling curves, etc to open the shadows and you'll get posterisation, etc. *

I might add, that when converting your raw file to a tiff, that the histogram should have no empty area to the right. This would be wasted data. You can always correct later with levels, curves, etc.. At least you have all the available to work with.

1- Highlights contain the most information
2- Shadows contain the least amount of information
--
Steve Bingham
http://www.dustylens.com
http://www.ghost-town-photography.com

 

[Horshack]

At least from the perspective of a raw file. Highlight headroom is a function of the exposure decision, a decision made either by the camera's AE or by the photographer. Once a digital pixel is saturated it is saturated, and no DSLR can recover detail from that pixel, esp. if all channels are at saturation. In this context I don't understand your blog statement "cannot share this enthusiasm when it comes to preserving highlight detail" in regards to the D7000.

 

[tsitalon1]

Silly question: I understand the Zone System as it refers to tone range within an image. What I don't understand is how to determine which zone highlights are placed in (as noted in the posted test).

Can you point me to a good article/site or - if it's simple - post a how-to.

Thanks.

http://www.outdoorphotographer.com/how-to/shooting/the-digital-zone-system.html

 

[Steve Bingham]

Well said. See my post above.

At least from the perspective of a raw file. Highlight headroom is a function of the exposure decision, a decision made either by the camera's AE or by the photographer. Once a digital pixel is saturated it is saturated, and no DSLR can recover detail from that pixel, esp. if all channels are at saturation. In this context I don't understand your blog statement "cannot share this enthusiasm when it comes to preserving highlight detail" in regards to the D7000.

--
Steve Bingham
http://www.dustylens.com
http://www.ghost-town-photography.com

 

[panos_m]

eNo wrote:

As some of you may know, one strategy to protect highlights in digital photography is to place them in zone 7. The following article tries to answer the question of whether the D7000's additional DR allows further exposure of the whites into zone 8 or 9 with full recovery of highlight detail. For reference, D7000 capability is compared with that of the D300's:

http://imagesbyeduardo.com/main/?p=2973

Hello,

Highlight range from zone V (18% grey) to clipping is the same for every digital camera (except Fuji S5?). 2.5 stops. The difference you observe maybe its because D300 and D7000 meter differently or because viewNX render the files differently or both. The advantage of the D7000 DR is in the range from middle grey to the shadows.
--
Panagiotis

 

[Steve Bingham]

True again.

eNo wrote:

As some of you may know, one strategy to protect highlights in digital photography is to place them in zone 7. The following article tries to answer the question of whether the D7000's additional DR allows further exposure of the whites into zone 8 or 9 with full recovery of highlight detail. For reference, D7000 capability is compared with that of the D300's:

http://imagesbyeduardo.com/main/?p=2973

Hello,

Highlight range from zone V (18% grey) to clipping is the same for every digital camera (except Fuji S5?). 2.5 stops. The difference you observe maybe its because D300 and D7000 meter differently or because viewNX render the files differently or both. The advantage of the D7000 DR is in the range from middle grey to the shadows.
--
Panagiotis

--
Steve Bingham
http://www.dustylens.com
http://www.ghost-town-photography.com

 

[eNo]

1- Highlights contain the most information
2- Shadows contain the least amount of information

Steve, in light of these two tenets, wouldn't it make sense that if you can safely shift the histogram to the right by one stop (as some of my sample shots seem to suggest you can do), you gain additional data in the shadows, so that when the exposure is adjusted in PP by applying opposite and equal compensation, you now have preserved highlights and more shadow data to play with? That's one of the questions I'm going after here, but I think I need more representative samples to really be able to tell.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Seeking the heart and spirit in each image



Gallery and blog: http://imagesbyeduardo.com
Flickr stream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/22061657@N03

 

[Robert Palmqvist]

Highlight range from zone V (18% grey) to clipping is the same for every digital camera (except Fuji S5?). 2.5 stops. The difference you observe maybe its because D300 and D7000 meter differently or because viewNX render the files differently or both. The advantage of the D7000 DR is in the range from middle grey to the shadows.

So increased DR (on a digital camera) is not equally distributed on both sides of zone V, why? And why "always" a 2.5 stop from zone V to clipping (is it by design or any other reason)? Just curious...

 

[eNo]

eNo wrote:

As some of you may know, one strategy to protect highlights in digital photography is to place them in zone 7. The following article tries to answer the question of whether the D7000's additional DR allows further exposure of the whites into zone 8 or 9 with full recovery of highlight detail. For reference, D7000 capability is compared with that of the D300's:

http://imagesbyeduardo.com/main/?p=2973

Hello,

Highlight range from zone V (18% grey) to clipping is the same for every digital camera (except Fuji S5?). 2.5 stops.

My experience, however, when moving from the D80 to the D90, is that the latter gave me more latitude to compensate for clipped highlights in post while not losing highlight detail. This is confirmed by DPR's D90 review (see my other response above in this thread).

The difference you observe maybe its because D300 and D7000 meter differently or because viewNX render the files differently or both.

Metering is not the issue here, since the over-exposed shots were intentional, offset from the baseline exposure (set the same for both cameras at base ISO) and hence not driven by what the camera's meter (matrix, etc.) was saying. ViewNX is another matter. In recent articles I've demonstrated that when pushed too hard, the exposure is really mangled in ViewNX. Others have claimed that alternative tools do better in this regard.

The advantage of the D7000 DR is in the range from middle grey to the shadows.

I think you're probably right there, and I will test that next with some representative shots, perhaps comparing against the D700 (and D300) as I have opportunity to experiment.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Seeking the heart and spirit in each image



Gallery and blog: http://imagesbyeduardo.com
Flickr stream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/22061657@N03

 

[panos_m]

panos_m wrote:

Highlight range from zone V (18% grey) to clipping is the same for every digital camera (except Fuji S5?). 2.5 stops. The difference you observe maybe its because D300 and D7000 meter differently or because viewNX render the files differently or both. The advantage of the D7000 DR is in the range from middle grey to the shadows.

So increased DR (on a digital camera) is not equally distributed on both sides of zone V, why? And why "always" a 2.5 stop from zone V to clipping (is it by design or any other reason)? Just curious...

Hi,
it is explained here:
http://www.libraw.org/articles/midtones-or-shadows.html
--
Panagiotis

 

[eNo]

Highlight range from zone V (18% grey) to clipping is the same for every digital camera (except Fuji S5?). 2.5 stops. The difference you observe maybe its because D300 and D7000 meter differently or because viewNX render the files differently or both. The advantage of the D7000 DR is in the range from middle grey to the shadows.

So increased DR (on a digital camera) is not equally distributed on both sides of zone V, why? And why "always" a 2.5 stop from zone V to clipping (is it by design or any other reason)? Just curious...

I'm curious, too, because in the past I've heard that increased DR for cameras like the D90 is primarily a benefit to the highlight range. From DPR's D90 review:

"To most people highlight range is the first thing they think about when talking about dynamic range, that is the amount of highlight detail the camera can capture before it clips to white."

"Experience has told us that there is typically around 1 EV (one stop) of extra information available at the highlight end in RAW files and that a negative digital exposure compensation when converting such files can recover detail lost to over-exposure."

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond90/page22.asp

My little test pretty much confirms that 2nd paragraph.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Seeking the heart and spirit in each image



Gallery and blog: http://imagesbyeduardo.com
Flickr stream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/22061657@N03

 

[Steve Bingham]

Exactly.

Also keep in mind that the camera histogram comes from a jpg image so it might show clipping where none really exists in the native camera raw file. In this case it would make very good sense to carefully push the histogram to the very right edge - and get maximum data and minimum noise.

1- Highlights contain the most information
2- Shadows contain the least amount of information

Steve, in light of these two tenets, wouldn't it make sense that if you can safely shift the histogram to the right by one stop (as some of my sample shots seem to suggest you can do), you gain additional data in the shadows, so that when the exposure is adjusted in PP by applying opposite and equal compensation, you now have preserved highlights and more shadow data to play with? That's one of the questions I'm going after here, but I think I need more representative samples to really be able to tell.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Seeking the heart and spirit in each image



Gallery and blog: http://imagesbyeduardo.com
Flickr stream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/22061657@N03

--
Steve Bingham
http://www.dustylens.com
http://www.ghost-town-photography.com

 

[Robert Palmqvist]

1- Highlights contain the most information
2- Shadows contain the least amount of information

Steve, in light of these two tenets, wouldn't it make sense that if you can safely shift the histogram to the right by one stop (as some of my sample shots seem to suggest you can do), you gain additional data in the shadows, so that when the exposure is adjusted in PP by applying opposite and equal compensation, you now have preserved highlights and more shadow data to play with? That's one of the questions I'm going after here, but I think I need more representative samples to really be able to tell.

I was asking myself the same question and came up with the same theory but it wont work if there is always a 2.5 stop between zone V and saturation/clipping, right? It would always push the histogram to the left in case of increased DR, wouldn't it?

 

[Steve Bingham]

And I would add, possibly waste informatio.

1- Highlights contain the most information
2- Shadows contain the least amount of information

Steve, in light of these two tenets, wouldn't it make sense that if you can safely shift the histogram to the right by one stop (as some of my sample shots seem to suggest you can do), you gain additional data in the shadows, so that when the exposure is adjusted in PP by applying opposite and equal compensation, you now have preserved highlights and more shadow data to play with? That's one of the questions I'm going after here, but I think I need more representative samples to really be able to tell.

I was asking myself the same question and came up with the same theory but it wont work if there is always a 2.5 stop between zone V and saturation/clipping, right? It would always push the histogram to the left in case of increased DR, wouldn't it?

--
Steve Bingham
http://www.dustylens.com
http://www.ghost-town-photography.com