PDA

View Full Version : Dynamic Range fix in Olympus E-3


dennisg
25th December 2007, 07:27 PM
:confused:I own an E Volt 500 and the dynamic range is clipped at the black and white ends of the range. This was also noted in its review on DP Review.

Does anyone know if this problem has been corrected in the new E-3 model? I plan to buy this sometime in 2008, but want to know how this has been corrected in the new configuration.

bammo
26th December 2007, 09:22 AM
:confused:I own an E Volt 500 and the dynamic range is clipped at the black and white ends of the range. This was also noted in its review on DP Review.

Does anyone know if this problem has been corrected in the new E-3 model? I plan to buy this sometime in 2008, but want to know how this has been corrected in the new configuration.

I never had blown highlight problems with the e500. Just shoot in RAW. If I remember rightly, you can recover a very decent amount of highlight and shadow detail at RAW processing.

dennisg
26th December 2007, 09:46 PM
*smileysanta Yes I realize that Raw is a better format. I shoot at the largest JPEG and the least compression at 2.7 times. The RAW format is nice but requires a lot of work after the fact. But I will try your suggestion. Thanks!

bammo
27th December 2007, 12:44 AM
*smileysanta Yes I realize that Raw is a better format. I shoot at the largest JPEG and the least compression at 2.7 times. The RAW format is nice but requires a lot of work after the fact. But I will try your suggestion. Thanks!

It's cheaper than a new camera. If you're like me, you'll find that work eye opening and fun. Especially if you use something faster than Oly master, but it's simplicity will give you a good starting point. It only gets scary when you come back from a holiday or something with hundreds of images to sort! Have fun. ;)

dennisg
27th December 2007, 01:05 AM
If Olympus' Master is not the vehicle to do this work in, what do you recommed? I have been waiting for DxO to release a version for the Olympus line, but they seem to skip over us Olympus users. It is a super photo editing software for RAW images. I also have Bibble lite 4.8. I will try that when I shoot the RAW format.

When I get some shots done, I will create a gallery here and you can view my outcomes.

Thanks!

R MacE
27th December 2007, 01:21 AM
Lightroom can bring back highlights better than Studio.

bammo
27th December 2007, 01:41 AM
If Olympus' Master is not the vehicle to do this work in, what do you recommed? I have been waiting for DxO to release a version for the Olympus line, but they seem to skip over us Olympus users. It is a super photo editing software for RAW images. I also have Bibble lite 4.8. I will try that when I shoot the RAW format.

When I get some shots done, I will create a gallery here and you can view my outcomes.

Thanks!

Oly master is OK really, just slow. And it doesn't have that much for processing multiple images. I'd start with that if you're finding raw daunting as you'll be able to relate it's options to your camera settings. When you've got the hang of that, there's loads more to play with. It's down to personal choice.

I've not tried bibble, but adobe camera raw is what i'm using with elements. I got Capture one free with a memory card and that's good too. Ufraw is free and quite flexible, but perhaps technical for the beginner with its curves etc. Raw shooter essentials is compatible with the e500 and also free, and it's what I started with, and what convinced me to stick with raw. With this, you can have different versions of the same raw image in different tabs to compare to each other. Lightzone is complex and the trial expired before I got the hang of it, so perhaps not for the beginner.

To start with, why not shoot raw + jpeg? Then you can tweak the raw if you feel your image needs extra work, and leave it if it doesn't. You'll also have the in-camera jpeg to compare with, which should help keep you in your comfort zone.

Remember, if you start with white balance 'as shot' then your colour at least will be consistent with the jpeg.

Don't be afraid to experiment as, if you don't delete the raw, you can revisit it as many times as you like.

Before spending money on raw converters, think about a hardware screen calibrator so you can trust what you're seeing on screen. Oly master, your bibble or raw shooter essentials should suit you for a while anyway.

Hope that's been useful. :)

bammo
27th December 2007, 01:44 AM
Lightroom can bring back highlights better than Studio.

It is expensive for a beginner though.

shenstone
27th December 2007, 09:43 AM
*smileysanta Yes I realize that Raw is a better format. I shoot at the largest JPEG and the least compression at 2.7 times. The RAW format is nice but requires a lot of work after the fact. But I will try your suggestion. Thanks!
*bauble*bauble*bauble*bauble

That's why I always use the RAW+SHQ Jpg on both my E500 and me E510. In 90+% of cases when I need a quick JPG then the in camera processed images is quite sufficient or requires only minimal post processing. It's heavier on flashcard and disk, but as the price of such is dropping all the time it's quite feasible to do. *rudolf

Even if you don't do anything with them at present you may want to in the future. I'd recommend at the very least that you consider storing them offline on DVD's as the tools to process them are getting cheaper and easier all the time.*waving

Regards
Andy

yorky
27th December 2007, 11:23 AM
I reckon Elements is about as good as it gets for the price. I have a trial version of psp which isn't bad and allso processes HDR which elements doesn't. But, theother way of avoiding blown highlights is a Grad Nat density filter.

RSGodfrey
27th December 2007, 11:34 AM
Bammo

The initial outlay for Lightroom and similar software may seem a lot but you are buying a powerful tool that will give you years of service and satisfaction in enhancing your images.

We seem to take for granted how our hobby has been transformed by digital technology. Think of film cameras and how we have to pay for the privelege for strangers to develop our images unless you have the time and resources to have your own darkroom.

Digital photography has democratized the hobby and given us the potential to become artists; the investment in the necessary tools is trivial compared to the prize in self-development and satisfaction.

Richard

bammo
27th December 2007, 11:52 AM
I reckon Elements is about as good as it gets for the price. I have a trial version of psp which isn't bad and allso processes HDR which elements doesn't. But, theother way of avoiding blown highlights is a Grad Nat density filter.

Elements is good.

However, don't overuse the highlight recovery or fill light sliders if elements is what you're using, as you will get some nasty artifacts between sky and land. I had this and it took me ages to work out why. It appears when you sharpen, and looks like a strange cartoon line.

What I do is have white balance as shot, then tweak it from there. I set everything to 0, as the defaults aren't up to much. Then I set exposure for the highlights so they are to the right as much as poss. without clipping, then blacks if needed to stretch the histogram (i find it very rarely is), then brightness and contrast.

If i've used fill light or recovery then i'll check with a test sharpen at small radius and medium amount to make sure it's alright.

I believe the current perceived best practise is a small amount of shapening during raw processing, then a final sharpen in your photo editor of choice, tailored to your intended output size and medium.

bammo
27th December 2007, 12:00 PM
Bammo

The initial outlay for Lightroom and similar software may seem a lot but you are buying a powerful tool that will give you years of service and satisfaction in enhancing your images.

We seem to take for granted how our hobby has been transformed by digital technology. Think of film cameras and how we have to pay for the privelege for strangers to develop our images unless you have the time and resources to have your own darkroom.

Digital photography has democratized the hobby and given us the potential to become artists; the investment in the necessary tools is trivial compared to the prize in self-development and satisfaction.

Richard

There are many tools out there and lightroom doesn't suit everybody. In my view it's better to start with freely available tools and when familiar with raw processing, try a few trials to see what works for you.

People get passionate about their RAW software, but it's important to remember that not everyone's the same.

Wreckdiver
27th December 2007, 06:15 PM
:confused:I own an E Volt 500 and the dynamic range is clipped at the black and white ends of the range. This was also noted in its review on DP Review.

Does anyone know if this problem has been corrected in the new E-3 model? I plan to buy this sometime in 2008, but want to know how this has been corrected in the new configuration.

Here are the results of a check of the dynamic range of my E-3. The measurements were taken off an 18% grey card under constant light conditions and then each exposure measured in Photoshop. The top figures are the measured brightness levels in Photoshop and the bottom figures are the Exposure Values from the camera. If you take a brightness range from 5 to 250 then the overall dynamic range is in the region of 7.3 f stops.

You can see from the data that the average exposure (0) is very close to the mid-point value of 127 and that the graph shows a characteristic S curve like that of film.

R MacE
27th December 2007, 09:57 PM
It is expensive for a beginner though.

It is although I got my copy free as an RSP user. To be honest I'd still be using RSP if it worked with E-3 files. I know I could convert to DNG but that just slows the workflow.

dennisg
27th December 2007, 10:04 PM
Thanks to all for the information! From what I read in all of the replies is to keep it simple up front when venturing into the RAW format when processing it.Some of the programs that I tried such as Bibble have way too many buttons, sliders and other built in second and third party capabilities. Thus making the job too intensive and confusing.

By the way, I have been usin Nikon's Capture NX for my JPEGS and very good I might say, but it will not process ORF Files unfortunately. So that is why I need to find a thorough but managable software to venture into the RAW world.

I have a external USB drive so the space won't be an issue. Just need more cards to capture the images on the rig.:o

bammo
28th December 2007, 12:45 AM
Thanks to all for the information! From what I read in all of the replies is to keep it simple up front when venturing into the RAW format when processing it.Some of the programs that I tried such as Bibble have way too many buttons, sliders and other built in second and third party capabilities. Thus making the job too intensive and confusing.

By the way, I have been usin Nikon's Capture NX for my JPEGS and very good I might say, but it will not process ORF Files unfortunately. So that is why I need to find a thorough but managable software to venture into the RAW world.

I have a external USB drive so the space won't be an issue. Just need more cards to capture the images on the rig.:o

Check before buying, to make sure the promotion is still going on, but sandisk extreme iii cards come with capture one LE, which is very good, and works well with E500 files.

At least, the 4gb ones do/did anyway. You'll fit around 300 raws on these cards.