Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 10/06/2025 in Posts

  1. Ilkka Nissila

    RAW Momentum?

    While I think it would make sense for hybrid cameras to offer similar "looks" across photos and video for easier presentation together, I am not really sure storing photos in log format makes sense. First, while linear encoding would waste bits due to the highlight photon shot noise making the least significant bits meaningless, this has already been corrected in compressed raw file formats such as Nikon's (technically lossy but visually lossless) compressed NEF. If I recall correctly, Nikon simply leaves out the LSBs in highlight pixels, thus saving storage space. In log video mode, cameras bias the exposure metering to produce about three stops of underexposure compared to normal SDR photos, and this leads to a lot of noise in the main subject (if there is one). It may not be such an issue for video because in video you can do temporal noise reduction which you cannot do for photos since they're individual frames with different content in each image. Usually in still photography, people want the main subject to have the highest possible image quality, and exposure metering algorithms typically emphasize the detected or selected subject and only secondarily protect highlights from blowing out. I still almost always increase midtones in post-processing by a curves adjustment, reducing highlight contrast and bringing the subject (midtones) up in brightness. For scenes that require a large dynamic range, many photographers I know of shoot a set of bracketed frames in order to ensure high SNR for each major part of the image and then merge the images with masks or other such techniques (depending on the subject). For video, exposure blending with masks is not possible but some automated DR-enhancement methods that blend two amplification levels exist in a few cameras (dual gain output). While the idea of having highlight exposure latitude is appealing, it comes at a cost in the midtone and shadow SNR and I think many still photographers would consider the outcome to be of poor quality compared to what they are used to. It's also the case that many if not most (?) still photographers use Auto ISO and manual exposure mode as their go-to exposure mode and they expect the camera in most cases to set the ISO precisely to get close to the desired brightness for the main subject as they are shooting. I often set the camera to ISO 100 or 64 and Auto ISO, lettting the camera vary ISO from 64 to 12800 to get the exposure correct and the photos near usable as they come out of the camera with minimal tweaking. This won't work for log as most of the ISO settings are unusable in log given the 3 stop underexposure built-into the approach. Yes, you can apply +2-3 stops of EV correction and then get similar results to linear modes but then the exposures on the screen will look off and it's harder to see the subject and get the correct feeling of the scene and how it would render in the photograph. I just don't see this going anywhere outside of a few filmmakers wanting look-matched still photos when video is their primary output. Still photographers outside of agency photojournalism shoot raw and that's that for the most part.
    1 point
  2. KnightsFan

    RAW Momentum?

    This is my reason for shooting photos raw. The difference between 8-bit jpeg and raw photos is much greater than between 10-bit log and raw video. And also most in-camera jpeg profiles aren't exactly documented, afaik. With a documented log curve you can adjust white balance and exposure in post, and while you lose "some" fidelity vs raw, the transformations are accurate. So on a slightly different topic, I'd personally really like for more photo cameras to shoot 10 bit log photos, and for standard photo editing software to have the same kind of color management that Resolve has. I don't do anything crazy to my photos, but I do see the limits of 8 bit jpeg in normal use, which I do not see with 10 bit log video. Overall, I sort of suspect that most people who want to shoot raw video already are. External raw recorders are easy enough, so if you're already committed to the workflow and HDD requirements, the external recorder often isn't the breaking point.
    1 point
  3. @kye, your framing, beyond that of a traveller, unveils the eye of an artist :- )
    1 point
  4. You seem to post nothing but angry negative stuff. Why waste your time with all of us talentless hacks?
    1 point
  5. Enjoy. Do you prefer cinema when it's busy or borderline empty? I think I prefer to go on quiet days.
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...