A720 IS and its overexposure-behaviour - page 2 - General Discussion and Assistance - CHDK Forum

A720 IS and its overexposure-behaviour

  • 50 Replies
  • 15074 Views
Re: A720 IS and its overexposure-behaviour
« Reply #10 on: 02 / July / 2008, 16:08:51 »
Advertisements

Re: A720 IS and its overexposure-behaviour
« Reply #11 on: 02 / July / 2008, 16:56:47 »
I'm not sure of this, but Canon may deliberately overexpose their images a little on P&S cameras. 

Have you heard of "shooting right"?  The camera sensors collect data in linear space then a non-linear mapping (like a square root) is applied to go to RGB space.   Because of this non-linearity there is more information in the bright parts of the image than in the dark parts.  So overexposing a little can help to reduce noise in dark areas.

To see this consider that the square root of .5 is .707.  So half of the dynamic range of the sensor (0 to .5) is mapped to 0 to .707 and the other half goes from .707 to 1.

Jon

*

Offline wap4

  • **
  • 95
  • A720IS
Re: A720 IS and its overexposure-behaviour
« Reply #12 on: 03 / July / 2008, 02:34:25 »
I played around with RAW, but i spent too much time with the workflow (dng-conversion, whitebalance, saturation, ...) and the only cool freeware-tool i found (raw-therapee) is very slow (despite having a fast pc).

Yes, RawTherapee is indeed slow, (it may sometimes even hang if you run R-L deconvolution sharpening or try to recover highlights using color propagation)

I advise you to keep the preview 1:5 or smaller to speed up things & enable the detailed view if you need to see the effect on 100% crop.

Regarding dynamic range, RaduP is much correct in saying that the sensor blooming is flattening all textures on white t-shirt.
You can, however, experiment in RawTherapee by altering the tone curve, and changing the highlight recovery method to color propagation, or just apply well known methods of exposure blending with layer masks.Use these cautiously as results may be often unnatural (lack of contrast, saturation) and if possible, never delete the DNG files. You will be better in processing them as your experience grows.

I've found that you can recover more highlight detail (with color) in ACR (Adobe Camera Raw) than RawTherapee. But ACR also has a peculiar behaviour :- Unlike RawTherapee, it clips highlights abruptly so I don't use ACR for night scenes with halogen lamps. (This is an issue with orange lighting only, not fluroscent lighting)
« Last Edit: 04 / July / 2008, 01:28:05 by wap4 »

*

Offline PhyrePhoX

  • *****
  • 2254
  • make RAW not WAR
    • PhyreWorX
Re: A720 IS and its overexposure-behaviour
« Reply #13 on: 03 / July / 2008, 05:08:48 »
uhm, what's acr?


*

Offline LjL

  • ****
  • 266
  • A720IS
Re: A720 IS and its overexposure-behaviour
« Reply #14 on: 03 / July / 2008, 09:29:40 »
I'm not sure of this, but Canon may deliberately overexpose their images a little on P&S cameras. 

That's quite possible.

There is one thing, though... viewpix is saying that if less exposure is forced, the result is underexposed.
So it seems he just can't attain correct exposure.

That might mean that the picture itself is taken at the correct exposure, but that the JPEG processing "fakes" overexposure by mapping bright tones to white -- or alternatively, that the picture is indeed overexposed, but then the dark tones are darkened even more during JPEG processing.

This is not dissimilar from what you say below.

Quote
Have you heard of "shooting right"?  The camera sensors collect data in linear space then a non-linear mapping (like a square root) is applied to go to RGB space.

Just a little nitpick... I believe that an "RGB space" may very well be linear; it's just that the gamma function used is not.
And that would be because monitors and printed are generally non-linear (1.8 to 2.5 gamma in sRGB), and common (though debated) practice is doing the gamma adjustments in the picture itself rather than in the picture viewer or operating system.

Quote
Because of this non-linearity there is more information in the bright parts of the image than in the dark parts.  So overexposing a little can help to reduce noise in dark areas.

You mean more information squashed in the bright parts, don't you? (See below...)

But there is more! A CCD sensor has a certain amount of noise (roughly the one captured by a dark frame) that doesn't depend on pixel brightness.
That means (or at least may mean, but I believe that to be the case) that the noise part, when considered as a percentage of the total pixel brightness, is higher in the darker pixels!

Why would we treat noise as a percentage of brightness? Well, because our eye sees it that way. Given a fixed absolute amount of noise, it'll be more noticeable on dark areas than bright ones.

From this follows that if you want some visible detail in the dark areas, you'll have to expose them longer than to obtain the same amount of visible detail in the bright areas, I think.

This might be what the Canon software is trying to achieve. Note that it's perhaps a mistake to think "the photo is overexposed and NOT underexposed" just because bright areas are totally white, while the dark areas are NOT totally black.
Even if they're not totally black, what you see may be 100% noise (or close enough to the noise threshold anyway), so, effectively, they'd be underexposed.
And that's a picture that, for practical purposes, is both over and underexposed.

Quote
To see this consider that the square root of .5 is .707.  So half of the dynamic range of the sensor (0 to .5) is mapped to 0 to .707 and the other half goes from .707 to 1.

This would mean giving the dark areas more detail, right? (And this is indeed much like the typical gamma correction function, as far as I know).

So you end up with wasted bits (all noise) in the dark tones, and with possibly too few bits left to encode bright tones (although this might be good, since our eyes are more demanding with the dark tones).
That's why I said "squashing" information before.

So again if you want to actually fill up the dark bits with information, you expose for longer.


My conclusion would be that if you just want to have the full sensor information with no surprise, you need the full 10 or 16 bits contained in the RAW (and encoded linearily). Then apply (or don't) your own gamma correction as desired.

Otherwise, playing with the "Contrast" setting in "My colors" might (or might not) result in changing the JPEG curves to give you more bits for the bright tones (and then step exposure down as needed when shooting).

Or still, you could use the CHDK build (which I believe exists) that lets you apply custom curves during RAW to JPEG conversation, which should be equivalent to - but maybe speedier than - doing RAW post-processing on a computer.

Re: A720 IS and its overexposure-behaviour
« Reply #15 on: 03 / July / 2008, 13:24:20 »

*

Offline LjL

  • ****
  • 266
  • A720IS
Re: A720 IS and its overexposure-behaviour
« Reply #16 on: 03 / July / 2008, 14:46:20 »
Well, this should be the relevant thread, but I'm not sure there is a binary build for the A720.

You can compile from source, with some patience, by following the instructions about compiling and applying the patches provided in the thread.

But maybe if you wait a little it'll end up in truck, in AllBest, in the collaborative build or somewhere... or for that matter, I could try making an AllBest build for the A720 myself (I have an A720 and I have the compiling environment set up), but don't hold your breath on this, because I always plan on doing things and then don't ;)

By the way, I've found this thread that's very much relevant to what we're talking about here.
« Last Edit: 03 / July / 2008, 15:30:16 by LjL »

*

Offline Jucifer

  • *****
  • 251
  • [A710IS]
Re: A720 IS and its overexposure-behaviour
« Reply #17 on: 03 / July / 2008, 16:35:18 »
Or... you could try the collaborative CHDK build. Be warned though, you may not want to go back... ;)


*

Offline LjL

  • ****
  • 266
  • A720IS
Re: A720 IS and its overexposure-behaviour
« Reply #18 on: 04 / July / 2008, 07:02:51 »
Ah, right, I should have known it's in there already... but when I opened the thread again, I searched for "curve" and didn't find that keyword, so assumed it was somewhere else  ::)

Information about the builds is still a bit scattered out... perhaps I'll play with the wiki.

Re: A720 IS and its overexposure-behaviour
« Reply #19 on: 04 / July / 2008, 14:21:13 »

 

Related Topics