4/14/2023 0 Comments Magic lantern canon db level![]() The only difference is the camera calibration I have to use in ACR. Originally, the conversion software didn't seem to work very well if the camera ISO was higher than the DualISO, but the latest version seems to do just about the same. I've been "learning" how to use it, and I am still experimenting with getting the best initial metering for the dual ISO capture. A1ex's dual ISO readout is an equally clever approach that promises even better coping with motion with extended DR. This leads to some complex frame blending issues that have been pursued and solved in novel ways, thanks to John Hable (GingerHDR). Previous extension of DR with ML (especially for video) used alternating ISOs but per frame - that is, capture frame 1 at ISO 1 and frame 2 at ISO 2 and combine these two frames into a single frame and repeat. The workflow required to convert your raw image to something useable is provided by additional applications or adaptation of existing open applications (like EXIFTool and dcraw). The tradeoff is half vertical resolution, as the above quote indicates, as well as aliasing in the highlights and shadows, where the skipping of lines is more evident. This means you are capturing a single image, including motion blur and moving objects with two exposures simultaneously. So, for example, you could use ISO 100 and 800 and shoot a scene that will read off half of the sensor at ISO 100 and the other half at ISO 800 (alternate sensor rows - actually alternating every two sensor rows to get the complete RGGB sensel block). In essence, ML permits you to set up your exposure so that, for a single click of the shutter release, half of the sensor data is acquired at ISO 1 and the other half acquired at ISO 2. If you are tempted to answer “yes”, read on. Would you trade half of vertical resolution for 3 stops of extra dynamic range?
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |