Extracting information from shadows and highlights

[tbob]

I don't want to shill for any particular program, I just am quite impressed with the ability of the Capture One program. Posted these for interest sake

Two examples of the interior of this old barn shot on a cloudy day at dawn, which admittedly helped with the dynamic range. Even so I am pretty impressed with what I could recover In both cases the comparison is a bit off, as the before shot is a little overexposed and the far barn door detail was not recovered from the bright area. However the interior was certainly darker as a consequence in the first example






Conversion








Conversion

[DanK]

impressive. Did you try any other software to compare?

[tbob]

I tried in Aperture (the other program I use) and Aurora HDR. Aperture made a horrid noisy pixellated mess when trying to get shadow detail. Aurora did better, still not even close and way too much tone mapping. The far door was hopeless in both.

[Shadowman]

Nicely done.

[Manfred M]

Trevor, the same functionality exists in Lightroom / Adobe Camera Raw as well as in DxO Optics Pro.

I use all four pieces of software and can confirm that they all do this equally well. Doing this during the raw conversion stage is important as this is were we have the maximum data available. With Photoshop and the Camera Raw filter, it has very similar functionality, but if pushed hard, it seems to have less data to work with than the raw file.

I use one or the other (often both) in many of my raw conversions. Opening up the shadow detail is important, as you show in your examples as it adds interesting details into those areas of the image. I reduce the highlights in a lot of shots on overcast days as it allows one to open up the textures in the clouds and turns images with boring skies into something a lot more interesting.

[dje]

Trevor a lot of editing software has shadow and highlight recovery adjustments of some kind these days however I've found that the quality and usefulness of these adjustments can vary quite considerably from one piece of software to another. It certainly pays to make comparisons between the software you have available.

One feature that I like to have is the ability to vary the range of highlights and shadows that are affected by the adjustments. Photoshop certainly has this feature and so does Affinity Photo. Other big names probably do also.

If your highlights are borderline to being blown, raw editors can do a reasonale job of recovering them within limits. Some raw processors do a better job at this than others.

Dave

[pnodrog]

I hope you give some credit to the dynamic range of the camera you were using to capture the image...

[DanK]

One feature that I like to have is the ability to vary the range of highlights and shadows that are affected by the adjustments. Photoshop certainly has this feature and so does Affinity Photo. Other big names probably do also.

Lightroom has this feature as well.

I've found that the quality and usefulness of these adjustments can vary quite considerably from one piece of software to another. It certainly pays to make comparisons between the software you have available.

Yes, my thinking too. There are so many other variables that go into the quality of the recovery that the most informative thing would be an A/B comparison of software, using the same raw file.

I hope you give some credit to the dynamic range of the camera you were using to capture the image...

That's of course one of the most important factors that makes it hard to know how much credit to give to the software. I'm guessing that none of the major software options could do this well with images from one of my cameras and that several could with images from my better camera, but that is just a guess, since I use no raw processing software other than LR/ACR.

[tbob]

I hope you give some credit to the dynamic range of the camera you were using to capture the image...

I reward my camera by getting it a nice pouch to ride in. And trying not drop it more than I can help.

[Donald]

I reward my camera by getting it a nice pouch to ride in. And trying not drop it more than I can help.

You're spoiling that camera!

[billtils]

You're spoiling that camera!

Out of curiosity (mine and perhaps Paul's too) can you tell us about the camera?

Like you, I went from Aperture to CaptureOne, the main deciding factor (apart from Apple withdrawing support) being that C1 combined library and editing functions (and left the Lightroom side of Adobe's 2-part answer of LR + PS in the dust as far as library import went).

[Manfred M]

I reward my camera by getting it a nice pouch to ride in. And trying not drop it more than I can help.

Have you ever looked in the camera bag of a commercial photographer?

The tools they have tend to have a totally beat up and abused look to them. The three year product release cycle for high end cameras nicely matches the "use" rate of a number of commercial photographers I know. That's the length of time before their cameras die because they have hit the number of shots the camera was designed to take.

[tbob]

Out of curiosity (mine and perhaps Paul's too) can you tell us about the camera?

Like you, I went from Aperture to CaptureOne, the main deciding factor (apart from Apple withdrawing support) being that C1 combined library and editing functions (and left the Lightroom side of Adobe's 2-part answer of LR + PS in the dust as far as library import went).

I use two Nikon D700's I have two as I got the second quite cheaply as a used body in good condition and it saves me swapping lenses in the dusty, snowy, windy environment I live in. Even so, on a regular shooting day I usually find myself swapping lenses one or two times. So that did not work out well! Nice to have two bodies the same, I am a bit technically challenged and having the same conformation saves me thinking and fiddling time.

[tbob]

Have you ever looked in the camera bag of a commercial photographer?

The tools they have tend to have a totally beat up and abused look to them. The three year product release cycle for high end cameras nicely matches the "use" rate of a number of commercial photographers I know. That's the length of time before their cameras die because they have hit the number of shots the camera was designed to take.

I must admit I regard my cameras and lenses like I do hammers; tools. That is why I stuck with the D700, does what I want and well. I probably use ten percent of the functionality of the camera anyway. I am upgrading to D850, because the high pixel count will let me do something I presently cannot, allow my family (in laws and outlaws included) to transfer old negatives to digital. I suspect the other features, in my hands, will be like using a Maserati to haul groceries. May not be the most economic solution to the transfer issue however i am not completely immune to gear lust; so what the heck

[billtils]

May not be the most economic solution to the transfer issue however i am not completely immune to gear lust; so what the heck

[Black Pearl]

This sort of shooting/exposure/processing is my stock in trade with my Fuji and something I love about a good sensor. A great example and nice images to boot.