RAW dynamic range or richness.

L

litenshade

Suspended / Banned
Messages
16
Name
Brian
Edit My Images
Yes
I have some experience of RAW processing, but am looking for basic advice on a new setup, and if I should be considering HDR software.

I've just bought a Nikon D5100 (14 bit) camera and walkabout zoom lens as a lightweight alternative to a very heavy Hasselblad (16 bit) system with 5 primes and a tripod. The former is my first conventional DSLR. The latter, which is totally manual, seems shockingly simple by comparison.

I've been Using either a Capture NX2 demo, or Raw Therapee on the Nikon, and Phocus on the Hasselblad.

The difference in results that I am getting is such that I suspect I am either doing something wrong with the new setup, or need to take a different approach.

Take an example shot lit by late afternoon sun, contains some whites, and some deep shadow. I'm looking for shadow and highlight recovery (both at once), and richness of tones. With the Nikon I can't avoid some loss of either highlights or shadows, and the only (believable) tones I can get are fairly neutral. With the Hasselblad, and Phocus software I find it easy to get all the tones, and really juicy colours.
 
I'm not sure theres an easy answer, theres too many things we don't know, how you shoot with the two cameras, how you meter etc etc. They are obviously going to give a different rendering, but really you'd at very least need to be processing in the same software (yes I know it's an issue) but you'd need a level playing field as a starter.
 
Yup. RAW convertors are all different. You are shooting in RAW aren't you?

You also need to factor in that a Nikon D5100 is likely to have a lower picture quality/dynamic range than a Hasselblad, how ever old the Hassy is....
 
Oops... Yes, you appear to be shooting RAW - missed it on the thread title ;)
 
Thanks for the comments.

Can you say which free or demo raw processors, and HDR programs (for use on the Nikon D5100) are worth spending time learning?

At the moment I do not know the Nikon, or the available software well enough to provide a level playing field. On automatic the histogram appears to show no clipping, but virtually no unused data either. The only reason for the comparison with the Hasselblad, was to say I think I am not getting the best out of the Nikon.

I am trying to decide on possible new software for the Nikon, to cope with fair but not exceptionally difficult contrast. i.e. blacks and whites in strong sun, but not deep shadow against the light.

I also like to make the most of late afternoon / early morning light. Despite the Hassy I am still using a 32bit machine, although an upgrade will eventually become necessary.

My thoughts on the likely performance difference:
I think the arithmetic suggests a potential two stop difference in latitude between 14 and 16 bit systems. The Hassy's individual pixels are just over double the size, but the Nikon has a later processor. I do not know how all that carries over into the real world.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top