Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Canon 10D Blown-Out Highlights

Reply
Thread Tools

Canon 10D Blown-Out Highlights

 
 
street shooter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-04-2004
My Canon 10D blows out highlights on a semi-consistent basis. In all
except very flat lighting highlights are completely lost when setting
the exposure from a grey card. I am fairly certain my metering
technique is correct. Using the same metering techniques with film, I
produce decent negatives with normal print times and highlight and
shadow detail which fall into place nicely; even my slides have a more
workable dynamic range than my digital RAW files. I have the 10D, a
512 MB CF card and the Epson 2200 photo printer. When I get good
results they are truly exceptional, but those good results have been
very few and very far between due to highlights so blown-out they are
not able to be recovered in post-processing, and do not yield any ink
coverage on Epson Premium Luster Photo Paper thereby leaving gaps in
ink coverage on the prints. I am seriously considering cutting my
losses and ditching all my digital equipment, but I'd rather not lose
my shirt on what is already a $3500 plus investment, when you count
the laptop that I bought specifically for digital photo applications.
Any suggestions and/or advice? If the technology is what is limiting
me I will happily return to film and not look back, but if there is
something I can do differently to achieve results which meet my
expectations I'd like to keep the option of photographing digitally
open.

Michael
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Robertwgross
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-04-2004
Michael wrote:
>My Canon 10D blows out highlights on a semi-consistent basis. In all
>except very flat lighting highlights are completely lost when setting
>the exposure from a grey card. I am fairly certain my metering
>technique is correct. Using the same metering techniques with film, I
>produce decent negatives with normal print times and highlight and
>shadow detail which fall into place nicely; even my slides have a more
>workable dynamic range than my digital RAW files. I have the 10D, a
>512 MB CF card and the Epson 2200 photo printer. When I get good
>results they are truly exceptional, but those good results have been
>very few and very far between due to highlights so blown-out they are
>not able to be recovered in post-processing, and do not yield any ink
>coverage on Epson Premium Luster Photo Paper thereby leaving gaps in
>ink coverage on the prints. I am seriously considering cutting my
>losses and ditching all my digital equipment, but I'd rather not lose
>my shirt on what is already a $3500 plus investment, when you count
>the laptop that I bought specifically for digital photo applications.
>Any suggestions and/or advice? If the technology is what is limiting
>me I will happily return to film and not look back, but if there is
>something I can do differently to achieve results which meet my
>expectations I'd like to keep the option of photographing digitally
>open.


(1) Do you use exposure compensation?
(2) Do you review the histogram immediately after the shot?
(3) Do you shoot RAW, or otherwise?

---Bob Gross---
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Bill Hilton
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-04-2004
>From: http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) (street shooter)

>My Canon 10D blows out highlights on a semi-consistent basis.


Can't you check for this on the histogram with "info" after the first shot or
two and then dial in exposure compensation as needed? You can set it so any
blown out highlights will blink during the preview.

>In all except very flat lighting highlights are completely lost
>when setting the exposure from a grey card.


Haven't experienced this at all with either a 10D or my new 1Ds.

>Any suggestions and/or advice?


Are you shooting RAW? What metering mode are you using? And are you checking
the histogram regularly? Should be easier to get accurate exposures with a 10D
than when shooting slide film, I've found.

Bill


 
Reply With Quote
 
leo
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-04-2004

"Robertwgross" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Michael wrote:
> >My Canon 10D blows out highlights on a semi-consistent basis. In all
> >except very flat lighting highlights are completely lost when setting
> >the exposure from a grey card. I am fairly certain my metering
> >technique is correct. Using the same metering techniques with film, I
> >produce decent negatives with normal print times and highlight and
> >shadow detail which fall into place nicely; even my slides have a more
> >workable dynamic range than my digital RAW files. I have the 10D, a
> >512 MB CF card and the Epson 2200 photo printer. When I get good
> >results they are truly exceptional, but those good results have been
> >very few and very far between due to highlights so blown-out they are
> >not able to be recovered in post-processing, and do not yield any ink
> >coverage on Epson Premium Luster Photo Paper thereby leaving gaps in
> >ink coverage on the prints. I am seriously considering cutting my
> >losses and ditching all my digital equipment, but I'd rather not lose
> >my shirt on what is already a $3500 plus investment, when you count
> >the laptop that I bought specifically for digital photo applications.
> >Any suggestions and/or advice? If the technology is what is limiting
> >me I will happily return to film and not look back, but if there is
> >something I can do differently to achieve results which meet my
> >expectations I'd like to keep the option of photographing digitally
> >open.

>
> (1) Do you use exposure compensation?
> (2) Do you review the histogram immediately after the shot?
> (3) Do you shoot RAW, or otherwise?
>
> ---Bob Gross---


Yes, this is the limitation of the current digital cameras. Fujifilm's new
super CCD SR sensor has large and small sensor units that may produce wider
dynamic range.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Mark M
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-04-2004

"street shooter" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) om...
> My Canon 10D blows out highlights on a semi-consistent basis. In all
> except very flat lighting highlights are completely lost when setting
> the exposure from a grey card. I am fairly certain my metering
> technique is correct. Using the same metering techniques with film, I
> produce decent negatives with normal print times and highlight and
> shadow detail which fall into place nicely; even my slides have a more
> workable dynamic range than my digital RAW files. I have the 10D, a
> 512 MB CF card and the Epson 2200 photo printer. When I get good
> results they are truly exceptional, but those good results have been
> very few and very far between due to highlights so blown-out they are
> not able to be recovered in post-processing, and do not yield any ink
> coverage on Epson Premium Luster Photo Paper thereby leaving gaps in
> ink coverage on the prints. I am seriously considering cutting my
> losses and ditching all my digital equipment, but I'd rather not lose
> my shirt on what is already a $3500 plus investment, when you count
> the laptop that I bought specifically for digital photo applications.
> Any suggestions and/or advice? If the technology is what is limiting
> me I will happily return to film and not look back, but if there is
> something I can do differently to achieve results which meet my
> expectations I'd like to keep the option of photographing digitally
> open.


--Look at the contrast settings on your camera's menu. Are they set to
high?
If so, this will darken shadows, and blow highlights more readily.
Set it to medium or low, and then look at result--ideally of three shots
back-to-back of teh same subject under the same light (changing the setting
each time).

--Convert RAW files to 16 bit tiff files. This will give you more leeway in
making small adjustments if needed. Also, you can tweak what the camera
interprets as the exposure after the fact as you convert.

--Get used to interpreting the camera's histrogram (Info Review), and refer
to it especially at any time you're under strong lighting where shadows and
highlight differences are greatest.

--Your grey card is great, but it tells your camera to meter for middle
tones. While this may be great for ensuring you've got a balanced exposure
for the scene, it doesn't mean it won't still wildly over expose those
portions of the image that are far brighter than a middle tone.

--The most sure solution: Shoot in light that isn't so harsh/strong (like
bright sunlight, or direct flash)...but you probably already knew that.



 
Reply With Quote
 
street shooter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-04-2004
(E-Mail Removed) (Robertwgross) wrote in message news:<(E-Mail Removed)>...
> Michael wrote:
> >My Canon 10D blows out highlights on a semi-consistent basis. In all
> >except very flat lighting highlights are completely lost when setting
> >the exposure from a grey card. I am fairly certain my metering
> >technique is correct. Using the same metering techniques with film, I
> >produce decent negatives with normal print times and highlight and
> >shadow detail which fall into place nicely; even my slides have a more
> >workable dynamic range than my digital RAW files. I have the 10D, a
> >512 MB CF card and the Epson 2200 photo printer. When I get good
> >results they are truly exceptional, but those good results have been
> >very few and very far between due to highlights so blown-out they are
> >not able to be recovered in post-processing, and do not yield any ink
> >coverage on Epson Premium Luster Photo Paper thereby leaving gaps in
> >ink coverage on the prints. I am seriously considering cutting my
> >losses and ditching all my digital equipment, but I'd rather not lose
> >my shirt on what is already a $3500 plus investment, when you count
> >the laptop that I bought specifically for digital photo applications.
> >Any suggestions and/or advice? If the technology is what is limiting
> >me I will happily return to film and not look back, but if there is
> >something I can do differently to achieve results which meet my
> >expectations I'd like to keep the option of photographing digitally
> >open.

>
> (1) Do you use exposure compensation?


Yes, and I still end up losing some highlight detail. I've pushed the
exposure compensation to the point where dark tones become murky and I
still get blown-out highlights.

> (2) Do you review the histogram immediately after the shot?


When I can, but as my screen name indicates my main photographic
interest is candid/decisive moment street photography. Hence, my
photographic style offers little leeway vis-a-vis reshooting a
particular image.

> (3) Do you shoot RAW, or otherwise?


RAW. I've tweaked contrast settings and just about every other
setting one could think of in Photoshop to little avail. I'm
extremely frustrated as this camera seems suited to photography in
very flat lighting situations only.

>
> ---Bob Gross---

 
Reply With Quote
 
Douglas MacDonald
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-04-2004
Change the exposure mode to single (centre) sensor. You could also shoot
raw. Either or both will achieve a more balanced result.
This example:
http://www.technoaussie.com/gallery/Model-T-Ford/grill was shot with a 10D,
Sigma 28~70 f2.8 in Queensland Australia at about 11:00 AM on a clear sunny
summer day. You don't get brighter conditions than this anywhere but on a
beach.

The original shot was in .jpg. If it was camera raw, I could have recovered
the sparkle on the front fender which is blown out. Shooting in jpeg mode
will give you more shots per card but it does so at the expense of detail.
The grill on this car was blacked out, I masked the black and used Photoshop
to lighten it. Whenever you shoot extremes of light and dark, shoot the
highlights. You can alway find some detail in the shadows.

Basically being able to pull exposure on the subject instead of the frame
wide sensors will reduce highlight blow out unless the subject is very dark.
Canon's metering (as set by the factory) is a little odd. It uses all the
sensors to pull focus and exposure which results in some pretty average
results when you have extremes of light and shade or need to focus on one
object in the frame.

Give up on the grey card for a while. Trust the force Luke!

Douglas


"street shooter" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) om...
> My Canon 10D blows out highlights on a semi-consistent basis. In all
> except very flat lighting highlights are completely lost when setting
> the exposure from a grey card. I am fairly certain my metering
> technique is correct.


> snipped.


> Michael



 
Reply With Quote
 
BG250
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-04-2004
I've found the same with any digital camera. There is little latitude to
work with. This is one area where film has the advantage.

I underexpose because it is easier to pull detail out of the shadows than it
is to get detail back from blown out areas (you can't). You said you are
using RAW which also helps with usable dynamic range.
bg

"street shooter" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) om...
> My Canon 10D blows out highlights on a semi-consistent basis. In all
> except very flat lighting highlights are completely lost when setting
> the exposure from a grey card. I am fairly certain my metering
> technique is correct. Using the same metering techniques with film, I
> produce decent negatives with normal print times and highlight and
> shadow detail which fall into place nicely; even my slides have a more
> workable dynamic range than my digital RAW files. I have the 10D, a
> 512 MB CF card and the Epson 2200 photo printer. When I get good
> results they are truly exceptional, but those good results have been
> very few and very far between due to highlights so blown-out they are
> not able to be recovered in post-processing, and do not yield any ink
> coverage on Epson Premium Luster Photo Paper thereby leaving gaps in
> ink coverage on the prints. I am seriously considering cutting my
> losses and ditching all my digital equipment, but I'd rather not lose
> my shirt on what is already a $3500 plus investment, when you count
> the laptop that I bought specifically for digital photo applications.
> Any suggestions and/or advice? If the technology is what is limiting
> me I will happily return to film and not look back, but if there is
> something I can do differently to achieve results which meet my
> expectations I'd like to keep the option of photographing digitally
> open.
>
> Michael



 
Reply With Quote
 
Chris Brown
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-04-2004
In article <(E-Mail Removed) >,
street shooter <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>(E-Mail Removed) (Robertwgross) wrote in message
>news:<(E-Mail Removed)>...
>
>> (3) Do you shoot RAW, or otherwise?

>
>RAW. I've tweaked contrast settings and just about every other
>setting one could think of in Photoshop to little avail. I'm
>extremely frustrated as this camera seems suited to photography in
>very flat lighting situations only.


What are you using to do the conversion? I use Photoshop CS raw import in 16
bit mode with a 10D, and typically meter for the highlights as 2-3 stops
above neutral. This gives me a good histogram and good highlight detail,
with about 6-7 stops of decent detail under that.

Canon's raw convertor seems to be less capable.
 
Reply With Quote
 
George Preddy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-04-2004
"leo" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<cSDlc.3262$(E-Mail Removed) ink.net>...
> "Robertwgross" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > Michael wrote:
> > >My Canon 10D blows out highlights on a semi-consistent basis. In all
> > >except very flat lighting highlights are completely lost when setting
> > >the exposure from a grey card. I am fairly certain my metering
> > >technique is correct. Using the same metering techniques with film, I
> > >produce decent negatives with normal print times and highlight and
> > >shadow detail which fall into place nicely; even my slides have a more
> > >workable dynamic range than my digital RAW files. I have the 10D, a
> > >512 MB CF card and the Epson 2200 photo printer. When I get good
> > >results they are truly exceptional, but those good results have been
> > >very few and very far between due to highlights so blown-out they are
> > >not able to be recovered in post-processing, and do not yield any ink
> > >coverage on Epson Premium Luster Photo Paper thereby leaving gaps in
> > >ink coverage on the prints. I am seriously considering cutting my
> > >losses and ditching all my digital equipment, but I'd rather not lose
> > >my shirt on what is already a $3500 plus investment, when you count
> > >the laptop that I bought specifically for digital photo applications.
> > >Any suggestions and/or advice? If the technology is what is limiting
> > >me I will happily return to film and not look back, but if there is
> > >something I can do differently to achieve results which meet my
> > >expectations I'd like to keep the option of photographing digitally
> > >open.

> >
> > (1) Do you use exposure compensation?
> > (2) Do you review the histogram immediately after the shot?
> > (3) Do you shoot RAW, or otherwise?
> >
> > ---Bob Gross---

>
> Yes, this is the limitation of the current digital cameras. Fujifilm's new
> super CCD SR sensor has large and small sensor units that may produce wider
> dynamic range.


It's a limitation of the old 90's-vintage Canon CMOS still used in
their current DSLRs. Have a look at any pic from a Canon CMOS and
you'll see that if there is any shadow detail, the sky will be pale
white and the highlites will be blown. Canon, not being primarily a
semiconductor company, still uses 486-level CMOS fabrication
technology in their DSLRs, the new CMOS chips like NSC's (Foveon is
National Semiconductor) Pentium4-level Foveon Pro 10M have better
dynamic range than film, and approach or exceed the DR of the human
eye, examples...

http://www.pbase.com/image/24653641
http://www.pbase.com/image/24323811
http://www.pbase.com/image/24323813

Note: Deep blue skies + shadow detail, impossible with Canon DSLRs.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Canon G1X blows highlights like Fuji X10 RichA Digital Photography 1 01-17-2012 02:02 PM
Mouse highlights check boxes in FF Prefs (linux)? anc Firefox 7 01-09-2006 05:40 AM
Digital Exposure Question -- Middle Gray vs Exposure At Highlights S. S. Digital Photography 3 06-24-2004 07:04 AM
expose for highlights or shadows? ralford Digital Photography 16 10-24-2003 03:33 AM
G3 oversaturated highlights wdh@esle.net Digital Photography 3 08-23-2003 10:08 AM



Advertisments