Editing high dynamic range images in PhotoLab 5

DxO PhotoLab
424

Thank you! I need to stop for a few weeks though, as my D750 is off to Nikon for a warranty repair of a new shutter - no idea when I’ll get it back, but I know it needs fixing, and I figure I ought to do it before they stop supporting it. That leaves me with my two Leica cameras, and my Df, none of which match the capability of the 750. I’m more tempted now than before to consider a Z camera (not the big new fancy one).

Regarding your changes…
a) I liked my sky yesterday, but I far prefer your sky, as the blue matches the water better. Yes, I was satisfied with it, but in retrospect your sky ties the whole image together better. …I wish I could “see” better. The first thing I thought of was a graduated filter for the sky, but using a control line as you did for the color is infinitely better. I will remember this next time. So 100 for “Luma” and Opacity. …my problem is I only see this after you do it. I need to make it part of my routine, and notice it, and think about it, when I’m first editing the image - or, edit the image, and come back to it a few hours later, and with a fresh viewpoint perhaps I’ll notice it before I post anything.

b) Pelican breeding season? To me, that crosses a line I’m not prepared to cross. I prefer your version, but to me, it’s no longer a “photograph”. There is no way that could have been done with film, in a darkroom. If I mail this out, or post it, the people I care most about will never trust me in the future, unless I say something about it.

c)

That was intentional, but it didn’t work. I was thinking that things closest to me should be brighter and clearer, but your version “works” better. The little peninsula shaped thing with the boat docks is “too bright and colorful”. Your way pushes the emphasis back onto the island and city, which was what I wanted. I can compare my masks to your masks, and this is obvious. I never came close to thinking about it, but your negative control line is what “fixed” my editing to the peninsula at the right. On your image, it is toned down, and having done that, you cropped a little more from the bottom which also helped.

Since the buildings are the focal point of the image, that is good. In a small image (email) it’s not very noticeable on the buildings, but it’s obvious that the white cruise ships benefitted from what you did.

Nice trick!!! Nah, it’s not a “trick”, it’s just getting the most out of the tools at hand. I never would have thought of this, but your image above showing how this negative control line worked on the image is worth its weight in gold.

I need to make these control lines part of my “vocabulary”, so I use them as easily as I use the crop tool.

My SUMMARY of what I’ve just learned…

That is my current goal. It’s one thing to know the classroom version of these tools, but it’s something much more to understand where and how to use them most effectively - as you do so naturally!!!

425

Very short addendum.

I downloaded your DOP, closed PL5, and re-opened. As you note, all three small images appear at the bottom of the “Customize” screen. In that tiny image, I like the original, prefer mine (other than for the sky, which looks obviously wrong) and prefer yours the most (except that my diplopia is now in triplicate).

Thanks for something that wasn’t obvious until right now - I guess because of the way I “see”, I thought my sky was fine, until I saw the thumbnail when it became obviously NOT fine. It’s like getting a whole new view of the image. I think long ago I used to look at my images in a mirror, to find things that stand out as needing attention, but the thumbnail trick seems to be all I need. In that small thumbnail, your sky looks more real than in the original “real” image, and it matches the water better. There is too much detail in the large image to distract me…

I’ll be away for a week with my brother, so I’ll have something different to work with including lots of opportunities with infrared. No D750 either until it gets returned, so I can either shoot with my M10 or my Df - of those two, the M10 is newer. Whatever I use, I won’t post any additional images to this thread.

Also, once again, I want to pass on a Thank You to you, @platypus @Wolfgang @OXiDant and everyone else who have been so helpful. I think someone at DxO could re-print your posts, with examples, as some kind of a reference tool others could use for learning. After over 400 replies to this thread, I’m not sure how new people will find the “gold” buried away in this thread.

Better yet, someone could make a wonderful YouTube video showing good examples of how to use the new PhotoLab tools on images. You, or someone, could make this into a “video textbook”.

As for me, my own summary is that every time I learn “more”, I also learn that there is so much MORE to be learned.

426

Out of curiosity, why a mirrorless as opposed to a reflex?

But only for this image. the next one could be totally different, even if it appears the same. It is so important to learn how to use the masks to determine these levels.

Oh, don’t worry, it’s not something I would do seriously, just this time for amusement.

Don’t you believe it! Take a look a the wartime photos of Frank Hurley. His reason for doing all this was to try and convey the horror of war in a time and place when it was not possible to have everything happening at the same moment, even though it could have happened in close relation. For one of his most well known images, he essentially, he took multiple negatives and combined them in the darkroom. That kind of image conveyed what he was living, possibly within one day, just not in one single negative.

Of course, he got pilloried by the “photographic powers that be” but he still ended up being awarded the honour of an OBE by King George VI, so no shame there then.

Just like I learned, during our visit to the cider maker, to read the instructions and not set the silent live view shutter mode to SL2, because it switches from 45Mpx RAW images to a few KB of low-res jpeg :flushed: :crazy_face:

And then there’s the fact that we both forgot to turn off vibration reduction on the lens when using our tripods :exploding_head:

427

I think it’s easier to catalog and copy your questions in a new thread and take your best answer out the replies of this thread by copy paste the html string… And then link the answer in your new post with all the questions in a row and then “info see here” linking the post of those answers. Like hyperlinks in a adobe manual.

Still, there are two sides of tripod and OIS features on or off.
OIS in lens is often always active, floating lens in the centre, only the switch is turning off the reaction of the coils for disalignment.
IBIS, is the same, floating sensorbay, again it has to be elavated in order to work.
With panning on a tripod yes, active IS will cause jerking mostly visible in video.

Modern firmware should detect no motion of the body and neutralize IS to default home position. So unless the image has a big and slow moving object in the framing the camera would notice no movement.
Then again if you have a on lens switch it’s easy to switch off and on.
Then your sure IS is neutralized.

428

" At 80mm focal length, anything I did to the camera caused the image in the viewfinder to “wobble” - anything. (My new tripod should be arriving any day now…) "

On a tripod, make sure that the image stabilization is turned off.

429

To quote from that link:

On a final note: it is well worth mentioning that, for the sharpest results when photographing still subjects, nothing beats a camera mounted on a sturdy tripod with the image stabilization turned off.

I need to remember to do this.

1 Like
430

I think your Nikon 80-200mm doesn’t have VR yet, but your modern 24-85mm.

431

One of the pros for mirrorless is the autofocus on human/pet face/eyes. It’s just great if you shoot moving subjects.
A second one is the Z lenses that brings you to another level.
But all this is relative since the best hardware is the one you have and use :smiley:

432

Correct - it doesn’t even have the built-in electronic motor for focusing. It was the least expensive version I could find, used.

The 24-85 has been sent back to KEH to fix the problem of unsharp images at the right side. Supposedly I’ll get it back in a few weeks. I hope.

Temptation…

433

Yes. Always. But then the finances often put an end to it :upside_down_face:
I tried the M10 for a couple of years -I thought I would stick to it-, but I am happy I did go back to my first love: Nikon. I have much more fun with my Z (autofocus -portrait with AI is lovely-, macro, telephoto, flash, so many possibilities… and price). Paired with PhotoLab and DeepPrime, it is an excellent match.

1 Like
434

Which Z do you have?

If the reason why I am shooting with the D750 because it is better than the M10, and the D850 is better than both, and if the new Z is better than all of the above (that’s an “if”, not a fact), and if I accept that the future of Nikon is the Z, then if I’m about to spend more money, shouldn’t I be looking at the newest Nikon? …and if I do look there, I believe the Z6 II has file sizes like what I’m used to - the Z7 II and the newest Z9 have file sizes twice that size.

Or, from a more realistic point of view, until I “graduate” from the College of Joanna, what reason do I have to buy any new hardware at all? Before I go after more dynamic range or more anything, I should perfect what I’m doing with my current camera gear.

If I was tempted, but not enough to do anything:
https://www.keh.com/shop/nikon-z6ii-mirrorless-digital-camera-body-24-5mp.html

I think a camera like Joanna’s D850 is better than the Z6, even if it’s older, and I have that choice as well:
https://www.keh.com/shop/nikon-d850-digital-slr-camera-body-45-7-m-p-1.html

Back to PL5, aren’t both my D750 and my M10 “good enough” at dynamic range to stop where I’m at, and learn how to get the most out of what I’ve got?

And finally, does it matter how “good enough” the camera is, until I, as in me, as in the photographer, am “good enough”? The “weak link” in my photographic skills is not my good current cameras, but me (I’ll leave out the M8, as while I enjoy it, it’s technologically far behind my other cameras, and my Df as well).

435

Who says what or when something/someone is ‘good enough’?
You can spend forever comparing yourself to something/someone and always feel you have not reached a certain point.

For me I’d say the fact that people can and do take great pictures on mobile phones (forget pixel peeping) shows that in reality for the vast majority of us we don’t need something that’s all singing and dancing with ridiculous megapixel count and everything. It’s about the enjoyment you gain for the activity.

However.

Sometimes it’s nice to have it regardless.

If you can afford it and your bills are not going unpaid and there’s food in the cupboard then so what if you buy a fancy expensive camera regardless of being a hobbyist/amateur/pro/whatever.

Buy it if you will get pleasure from it.

I had absolutely no need to buy the Fuji X-T4. My previous Nikon was fine, however the Fuji makes me enjoy using it in a way the Nikon didn’t and I now use it more and have captured so much more as a consequence.

Life’s too short. So long as you can justify it go for it and enjoy it.

My 2cents anyway!

436

As @Lost_Manc says, everything is relative. And, yes, you are the weakest link and that will never change, whatever the camera and however much you spend on it.

I started out in photography at the age of 11, when my dad bought me a Kodak Instamatic. Back then, I had no aspirations to be a good photographer, simply to be able to take snaps like my dad did.

I can’t remember exactly when, but it might have been around when I was 15-16, when I left school and went to work in a camera store, thus giving me access to other photographers to inspire me but, more importantly, staff discount to help with the cost of buying better gear. So, between me and my dad, I acquired a Zenit B, along with everything needed to setup a small darkroom in my bedroom.

The problem was, I couldn’t afford much more than the standard 50mm lens and found that, if I wanted to “zoom in” on a negative, I would end up with a print of a dozen or so crystals of film grain instead of the intended picture of a cat nestled in the branches of a tree.

It wasn’t really until my early 40s, by which time I had started to earn better money as a programmer and acquired a Pentax ME Super, that my activity in photography was rekindled and, not long after, I added a Mamiya 645 to my armoury, in order to give me the chance of larger prints, which got partly paid for by doing a couple of weddings in my spare time.

Then came that fateful day when we stumbled across the announcement of an LF photography workshop where an LF camera would be available for us to try out. Being totally frustrated with the lack of detail in 35mm, or even 645 film, both Helen and I jumped at the chance and, thus started the process of mastering things like the Scheimpflug principle and the Zone System. (and spending a whole load of money on LF gear)

This is where our photography really took off to a whole different level, because we had to become so intimately acquainted with our cameras and there was nothing automatic to “take over control” if we couldn’t work it all out ourselves.

Helen wanted a Mamiya RZ67 as a “lightweight” alternative for those occasions when 5" x 4" was just too much like hard work and I got a Mamiya 7 II as a walkabout camera. And, around the same time, digital photography had started and we decided to give it a go and, since reusable memory cards were a darned sight cheaper than rolls of film, we traded in our Pentax cameras and lenses and bought a couple of Nikon D100 bodies and 28-200mm zoom lenses.

From then on, we upgraded to the D200 when they came out, because the 6Mpx D100 had nowhere near enough to replace 6cm x 7cm film and found that, although 10 Mpx was better, it wasn’t by much, but we tended to use them as lightweight “memory making” cameras whilst still using LF and some MF film for serious photography.

Then came the digital game changer - the D810! Finally, we had found a digital camera that was capable of replacing our MF gear and so, the MF gear has been residing in a cupboard from that moment on. The LF gear is awaiting the end of travel restrictions to allow us to go to places we haven’t yet been, with the opportunity of making some more extraordinary images that digital still can’t match.

Behind this nostalgic ramble is the principle that we only ever upgraded when the equipment we had couldn’t achieve our passion of high quality large prints. Of course, we could have stuck with LF film but you can’t easily make images of moving subjects.

So we are left with LF for stunning landscapes that can fill a wall, MF film for those times when we want the nostalgia of film combined with the ability to use it without a tripod; and the D810s for everything else, because we can make 40" x 32" prints without even drawing breath.

Which leaves the recently acquired D850s. Why did we upgrade yet again? Purely because it is the last DSLR Nikon seem to be going to make and we prefer optical viewfinders. Will we keep the D810s? Well it does give us the opportunity to have a different lens available without having to risk dust on the sensor.

Does the Nikon D850 make us better photographers? As you well know, the answer is a definitive no, but is does make certain types of photography easier, something I can’t say about the Z series, which forces us down the digital viewfinder or live view route.

Buying a(nother) camera will not make you any better a photographer. You will have to learn a whole load more technical stuff which can get in the way of seeing and making images.

I still find that the “purity” of the LF process forces me to think before pressing the shutter instead of taking a whole load of shots that only might work in post-processing. And it is this process that we both try to continue with our digital cameras.

Mike, I know you think you want a Z series but knowing your dislike of technology getting in the way, would you not miss the optical viewfinder of the D850? Whichever you go for, the extra Megapixels are definitely worth it, but I have found that even having to use the live view on the D850 for various new features, it has already “got in the way” to the extent that I accidentally ended up with minute JPEG files instead of normal RAW files, simply because I assumed the wrong setting in a not obvious menu.

If it weren’t for all the mess of chemicals, scanning and de-spotting; and apart from the huge cost of film nowadays, there are times when I would dearly love to stick with good old LF film.

1 Like
437

There are a lot of things to consider, but regarding what you just asked, Suppose I compare my optical viewfinder of my D750 to the digital viewfinder of my Fuji. The big question then, is do I want to see what is being covered by my camera (D750 or M10), or the digital information the camera is about to capture (which I will be shown again after the capture for a second or so). I assume the digital viewfinder on a Z camera will be similar to what the Fuji has and shows.

To be honest, I “enjoy” the optical viewfinder more, as it’s just looking at the scene with my eyes. The digital view doesn’t seem as awesome, but I know it’s more “realistic” as in that is what my photo will look like. So, do I want to be looking at “what I see” or “what the camera sees”? With the Fuji, there are no surprises later. I get what I saw. Nothing is “perfect”, but the “digital” view is probably most useful. Of course, on the Fuji, I can switch back and forth between optical and digital.

The smartest choice I could make would be to buy a Z camera and lens adapter from KEH, see what it’s like to use, and if I don’t like it, send it back. I would still need to choose between a 24 meg sensor and a 50 meg sensor, with the added $$$. The most practical choice I can make though, is to forget about all this, and enjoy using what I’ve already got.

438

Since I used the live view screen on my D850 (or any other camera) for the first time to do a serious shoot, I can tell you it was not a pleasant experience.

First, I couldn’t get rid of the high contrast white on black info strip on the bottom of the screen, which is far more intrusive to the eye than the subtly and barely visible strip in the optical finder.

Second, I was shooting in very low light and found that whatever combination of aperture, shutter speed and ISO I chose, the screen was filled with colour noise and shimmered continually, as in this example I just made…

With an optical finder, I can see exactly what is there, although one useful feature of live view is the focus peaking highlights that appear, even in low light, to show it is in focus.

My point being, possibly only if there is enough light to avoid the kind of mess you can see in the video.

They let you buy a new camera to try out and then send it back used?

Seriously, if you’re going to make the move, why stick with the same resolution you’ve already got on the D750, when you could continue to use the D750 and spend the money on better glass?

It all depends on what you are planning to do with your photography. If it’s just going to be small scale printing and web pages, stick with your newly refurbished D750.

On the other hand, what else are you going to do with the money? I didn’t have to upgrade to the D850, but I did, for various reasons, not excluding - after nearly two years of not going out for meals, no holidays and not driving anywhere much, I had just about saved up the price and felt it was time I treated myself.

From my point of view, you pays your money and you makes your choice. But I would add that maybe it’s time to realise your investment in Leica and sell it to pay for some really decent glass for that new Nikon.

439

Getting the technically best camera and lenses makes life easier: Every fault will be the photographer’s!

Top ten cameras with best landscape rating according to DxOMark:

Bildschirmfoto 2021-12-06 um 19.33.01.668
Bildschirmfoto 2021-12-06 um 19.33.01.6681920×1457 118 KB

440

Live view is completely different - that shows on the back screen of your camera. My digital view in my Fuji X100f viewfinder is similar to my optical view, but the digital view can have lots of additional information superimposed on it.

I have never yet looked through a digital viewfinder on a Nikon Z, but the only way I will know for sure is to hold it in my hands and look through it. In my Fuji, the digital view appears “sharper”. Other than for my Fuji, I have never liked any digital viewfinders in any of my other cameras. Nikon supposedly has greatly improved this.

I’m with you - if what I see looking through a Z camera is not at least as nice as from a DSLR, I won’t switch over. If it looks like “live view”, with a low resolution screen, I’m out.

I have no idea. Maybe I should read more about a Z Nikon - better yet, try one.

Yes, as KEH mostly sells used cameras and gear.

Well, I grew up with rangefinder cameras, and if someone told me I had a choice and could only keep my Nikon stuff, or my Leica stuff, the Nikon gear would be gone, although I would get a tiny fraction of what I thought it was worth, but I could replace all of it instantly should I want to. If I sold all my Leica gear, I probably couldn’t re-create what I’ve got, in the same condition as what it is now. Had you grown up with a Leica, I think you might feel the same way… …but forgetting that, were I shooting with the new Z, and 50 megapixels, I think the files would be too large to even upload to this forum. My hard drive would fill up, and my processing speed would probably drop dramatically. I thought 24 meg images were huge - I can’t contemplate 50 meg images.

THIS is the key to the real answer for me. There isn’t much reason for me to change my photo gear, but I very much like other features of the new cameras, such as focus tracking of animal and bird eyes.

441

I would say that is indeed a reason though or, at least a possible reason.

‘If’ those features could bring increased enjoyment and potentially increased use that to me that’s a good enough reason.

Like I said earlier though. assuming cost isn’t a factor. I would never encourage someone to spend what they couldn’t afford.

442

If it’s a choice of a D850 or Z7 II, you just answered my question - quality is about the same, but the “sports” (which I’m sure includes burst rate and eye tracking) is very important to me.

I took a photo yesterday of a hawk flying by me, using my M10 and a 135mm lens. The hawk is a tiny part of the full image, but I got a “useable” photo as it flew by, probably 15 feet away. The M10 was in burst mode, and the second the hawk took off, I held down the shutter release and panned with the bird until it landed. (The Z7 II would have captured many more images for me to choose from, and would have follow-focused on the eye…)

My brother used his Df with a 350mm lens, and he got MUCH closer, and got a crisp, clear, beautiful photo of the hawk sitting on a post, but I wanted an action photo. Unfortunately I left my Nikon gear at home. I know my M10 is totally inappropriate for this kind of photo, and the Z 7 II is perfect for it… But that’s a big expenditure… If I follow your advice, the Z7 II is probably what I need.

L1003650 | 2021-12-05.dng (27.9 MB)
L1003650 | 2021-12-05.dng.dop (14.6 KB)

L1003650 2021-12-05
L1003650 2021-12-051000×854 256 KB

443

Joanna, I found your answer I think - you can set the viewfinder to look “optical” or like “live view”.

https://www.nikonusa.com/en/learn-and-explore/a/products-and-innovation/nikon-z-system-electronic-viewfinder-evf.html

The “Apply settings to live view” function sets the camera so the EVF and the LCD monitor will display a similar color, brightness and contrast. Turn the setting OFF and both display a look more akin to what you’d get with an optical viewfinder, so whether you want to use the camera like a conventional DSLR’s optical viewfinder or not, the choice is yours.

You’ve also got instant access to various settings on the i menu by pressing the I button while shooting. Intuitively change settings while looking through the EVF by using the main and sub-command dials. You can even customize the functions assigned on the i menu and their layout.