Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
bill2reg

Difference between setting DR% vs. setting Highlight and/or shadow tone

Recommended Posts

It seems to me that setting your own highlight and/or shadow tone in the menu is very similar to what setting the DR% (100%-1600%) does. They all affect the amount of detail in highlight and shadow areas. The only thing that I find different is that you can set highlight and shadow tones separately in the menu, rather than affecting both together with the DR setting. Am I missing something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DR settings 200% and 400% are underexposing the shot (with exposure compensation and tone-mapping during RAW development), contrast settings simply change the tonal curve of an existing RAW.

You can (of course) combine both functions to get the JPEG image that you want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think of DR as very subtle HDR. There is a lot of information captured in the shadow areas so it simply underexposes, as FS says, then converts to jpeg by fixing the shadows, but leaving the highlights, which are less/not blown, the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So does either of them actually make a difference in the RAW image file? I usually shoot RAW+jpeg. Then, if the jpeg isn't satisfactory, I'll post process the RAW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the DR setting will affect the RAW file, while manual selection of highlight and/or shadow tone only affects how the jpeg will be created in-camera. I took some shots using both methods, and I don't really see much difference in the final result. I have more control without using DR and just 'fixing' the RAW file in post processing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe in Rico's book he mentions that there are benefits to setting the DR and shooting in RAW+JPEG mainly because it will allow you to get the viewfinder/EVF preview to be closer to what you intend to do with it later.

Ninja Edit: IIRC he does point out that if you are only shooting raw to leave it off entirely (set to DR 100%)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sweeze, so it seems that what I said is what he suggests. I said Ii have more control without using DR and process the RAW how I want to, and he says also if shooting RAW to leave it off (i.e 100%). That's kind of how I was leaning when shooting high contrast scenes. But also, as he points out, I can always set the DR to see the preview, then reset and shoot. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this DR setting or any of the multitudes of others affect the image file, then it is no longer a RAW file. I believe RAW image files have NONE of the cameras available alterations or adjustments except color temp and exposure comp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this DR setting or any of the multitudes of others affect the image file, then it is no longer a RAW file. I believe RAW image files have NONE of the cameras available alterations or adjustments except color temp and exposure comp.

You need to read Rico's article then you'll see why it is possible and why the file remains a raw file.

If you use ev compensation to reduce the exposure by 1 or 2 stops is the file not still a raw file? That is basically what the DR setting does but it does it with a degree of automation in that the sensor decides whether the dynamic range is so great that auto DR (or auto ev comp) is needed and it then adjust the exposure to under-expose by 1 stop or 2 stops and recovery of deep shadows is then made in PP on the raw file.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So does either of them actually make a difference in the RAW image file? I usually shoot RAW+jpeg. Then, if the jpeg isn't satisfactory, I'll post process the RAW.

Only in the sense that it is slightly under-exposed from what you have dialled in (don't know how much exactly, but depends on the % DR you set.) Then, when the camera creates the JPEG, it just adjusts exposure back up, leaving the highlights toned down to stop then being blown. Don't take my HDR too literally, I was just trying to get a point across, and this is just my understanding of it - I never use it... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, there certainly seems to be uncertainty in this. I've seen (in jpegs) how DR can flatten contrast by doing some deliberate high contrast exposures. I haven't experimented with H and S tone settings much. One X-photographer - Bert Stephani - mentions using the tone settings to "protect highlights" and "protect shadows". Which is an interesting way to put it. But still - is this just a jpeg effect or is RAW also touched? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

W

13 hours ago, LynnwoodRick said:

Read Rico's article. Still not clear on this.

  Here is a vlog from Bert Stephani. Interesting.

Wow, old topic!

Dynamic Range under-exposes the image to preserve highlights, and then performs "tone mapping" to brighten shadow areas.  Tone mapping looks at small groups of pixels or areas of an image and increases localised brightness and adjusts contrast as required.  It's why high DR settings can create "flat" looking images that seem to lack global contrast, and also shouldn't really be used on people pictures are it tends to make their faces look very smooth and plastic because it removes all the shadow/tonal detail in the structure of their face.

Just FYI - although the camera may report a higher ISO when using DR settings, it isn't "using a higher ISO to increase dynamic range" because actually, using a high ISO by itself will DECREASE dynamic range.  It is exposing at a lower ISO, and then applying the luminance adjustments described above to recover mid tone and shadow details - so it is similar in effect to using a higher ISO, but shouldn't really be confused.

Shadow and Highlight settings merely adjust the top and bottom end of the "curves".  Curves is a fancy way of saying contrast, and applies particularly to film makers, but is used to adjust whether the light and dark tones fade slowly or quickly to white and black.

The 2 things are different but can be used in combination.

The film simulations may themselves have different curves / contrast profiles too, so it's worth starting with the film simulation you like, then adusting the highlights and shadows to taste.  DR should only really be used when you have a scene with very high contrast where it's not possible to maintain highlight and shadow detail within a normal exposure.

I'm not sure how a video to explain film simulations takes 15 minutes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, LynnwoodRick said:

So do tone settings affect the raw file or just jpegs?

 jpeg only. They are only useful when shooting in camera jpegs. by all means shoot raw and adjust the camera settings to give a good view of the file - for example brightest shadows and darkest highlights may help you see the final potential of the raw file, but aren't included in its data.

even though I mostly work from raw, I will still set up the camera to simulate the final look I may want.

 

Fuji software may apply the same settings used from the raw, I don't know.

dr settings affect raw file contents.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recommended Discussions



×