Olympus E510 has poor dynamic range? Not any more.

Discussion in 'Olympus' started by Maat, Aug 28, 2008.

  1. Maat

    Maat Guest

    With this software I can create photos that have way more dynamic range
    than your expensive Nikon and Canon cameras. Well, once I learn how to use
    it properly I can. I will be churning out photos that surpasse your
    expnesive Nikon's capability on my cheapy Olympus E510 in no time.

    http://www.mediachance.com/hdri/index.html

    http://www.hdrsoft.com/
     
    Maat, Aug 28, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. ... and what display device will you use to show photos with such a dynamic
    range, without compromising what you have created? By the way, such
    software can use the data from almost any digital camera, irrespective of
    brand, and form factor.

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Aug 28, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Maat

    Maat Guest

    Um, nope. The one software app I listed can compensate for that too.
     
    Maat, Aug 28, 2008
    #3
  4. Maat

    Maat Guest

    Thanks, I'll check that one out too. One of the apps I posted is only
    $55.00 though and it does more than just tone mapping. Can compnesate for
    moving subjects etc.

    This wallpaper site has some really nice HDR photos. Check out this train
    photo.

    http://interfacelift.com/wallpaper/downloads/01627_441085atmuseum_
    2560x1600.jpg
     
    Maat, Aug 28, 2008
    #4
  5. Maat

    Maat Guest

    Irrelevant. Some people said $600.00 E510 has poor dynamic range and I am
    just proving that with this software I can surpass the dynamic range of
    even a pro Nikon or Canon.
     
    Maat, Aug 28, 2008
    #5
  6. Maat

    Ray Fischer Guest

    Using that software I can create photos using an expensive Nikon and
    Canon camera that has way more dynamic range than you "cheapy Olympus E510".
     
    Ray Fischer, Aug 28, 2008
    #6
  7. If you can't display what you have created, what's the point?

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Aug 28, 2008
    #7
  8. Maat

    D-Mac Guest

    Don't be so quick to gloat my friend. Fuji S5 which takes Nikon lenses
    can do what amounts to HDR for Olympus, in camera. One sensor for
    highlights, one for darks.
     
    D-Mac, Aug 28, 2008
    #8
  9. Oh, no you won't, mister. I don't *have* an expensive Nikon. :)
     
    Blinky the Shark, Aug 28, 2008
    #9
  10. Maat

    Doug Jewell Guest

    uhm... a monitor, a printout, uhm...
    Dynamic range is purely the amount captured range. When you
    display that the way it is reproduced is governed by the
    contrast ratio of the output device. It's always been the
    case that at the printing stage you would control the
    contrast to create the final image you wanted. A B&W neg
    held a very wide dynamic range. When you printed it, you
    could print with low contrast and have a print that retains
    both shadow and highlight detail from the neg, or you could
    print with high contrast, but lose some of the shadow and/or
    highlight details.
    Likewise with super HDR images - either print/display with
    low contrast and display everything that the HDR contains,
    or print/display with high contrast and lose some of the range.
     
    Doug Jewell, Aug 28, 2008
    #10
  11. Maat

    ASAAR Guest

    And using that same software, Maat can use a cheapy P&S to create
    photos that have more DR than his own Olympus E510 produces. As an
    opinionated but very entertaining egomaniac once said, TANSTAAFL.
     
    ASAAR, Aug 28, 2008
    #11
  12. Doug,

    I know of no reasonable-priced monitor or printer which will display the
    full dynamic range of HDR, which may be one reason why the results can
    look so ugly. Yes, with negatives and printing you could produce changes
    with burning and dodging, but these were best done with minimum
    intervention, and only selected areas of the image.

    I welcome capturing a wide dynamic range (including more of the lens flare
    <G>), but I think there is some way to go in understanding how best to use
    and display such a range - at least judging by what I have seen posted so
    far.

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Aug 28, 2008
    #12
  13. Maat

    D-Mac Guest

    What is your opinion of this shot David?
    http://www.d-mac.info/POD/POD-Aug-1408.htm
     
    D-Mac, Aug 28, 2008
    #13
  14. That reminds me of a very cheap camera system which was once offered
    to the hobby robot arm community for inspecting the table top for
    things you could pick up, such as chess pieces. It was so cheap
    because it was simply a one pixel camera, a photosensor at the bottom
    of a long thin tube. It could have been referred to as an elementary
    insect eye, as opposed to the more usual compound insect eye.

    All you had to do was use the robot arm to scan this drinking-straw
    eye over the table. There were no focussing or depth of field
    problems. Of course there were speed problems, but these could be
    hugely reduced if you already had some idea what you were looking for
    and where it was. Just a software problem as they say :)
     
    Chris Malcolm, Aug 28, 2008
    #14
  15. D-Mac wrote:
    []
    That's excellent, although the colours are oversaturated for my taste, the
    foreground a little brighter than I would expect, and I'm not quite sure
    about the way the mist changes across the city. This is well presented on
    my simpel 8-bit display.

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Aug 28, 2008
    #15
  16. Maat

    ASAAR Guest

    Ouch! That's tops my memories of using NEC Spinwriters and Diablo
    printers to produce B&W graphics by finely positioning and striking
    with the "period" character. At least the resolution and image
    quality was much higher than the images produced in the college
    computer centers years earlier using high speed page printers and
    teletypes, but as with your robot, speed was an issue. The page
    printers weren't nearly as slow as the teletypes, but one often had
    to wait quite a while for the jobs to get queued, printed and
    returned, assuming no JCL errors. :)
     
    ASAAR, Aug 28, 2008
    #16
  17. Maat

    Paul Furman Guest

    By some definitions, HDR means a larger than normal bit-depth file which
    is way beyond any jpeg but these programs apply tone mapping to bring
    out the contrast you want so it displays just fine on a print or
    monitor. That's just an intermediary format.

    --
    Paul Furman
    www.edgehill.net
    www.baynatives.com

    all google groups messages filtered due to spam
     
    Paul Furman, Aug 28, 2008
    #17
  18. Paul Furman wrote:
    []
    Agreed, Paul. I have no problem with that. Displaying such images does
    need to be done carefully, though, when the display device can't handle
    the full dynamic range. I have seem some HDR images, though, which are
    far from "just fine".

    This doesn't justify the OP's argument, of course, as such techniques are
    applicable to /any/ camera, not just the Olympus E510.

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Aug 28, 2008
    #18
  19. I have an inexpensive one -- which is not addressed in your prediction at
    all.
     
    Blinky the Shark, Aug 28, 2008
    #19
  20. Maat

    Maat Guest

    Don't know as I haven't even installed the software yet. I'm tyhe kind of
    photographer that takes photos of mostly static subjects so it is not much
    of an issue for me anyway.
     
    Maat, Aug 28, 2008
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.