Lenshacker Posted January 22, 2015 Share #21 Posted January 22, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Is the new debanding tool incorporated into M8RAW2DNG? I need to try more options... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 22, 2015 Posted January 22, 2015 Hi Lenshacker, Take a look here M8 hideous unusable high ISO performance thread. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
bla Posted January 22, 2015 Author Share #22 Posted January 22, 2015 Not yet, it's at a very early state. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted January 23, 2015 Share #23 Posted January 23, 2015 FWIW I never change the ISO setting on my cameras from base of 160 but rely in software to 'pull' the ISO..... ISO2500 (ISO160 4stops down), Photoshop CS2 for the post-process 4-stop pull, C'mon guys! Underexposing, and then boosting the image with processing, is a PUSH! Not a "Pull". Same as it is for film. "Pulling" your processing is to OVEREXPOSE, and then reduce the brightness in the processing. 6 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted January 23, 2015 Share #24 Posted January 23, 2015 Same as it is for film. Its so long ago that I 'pushed' film that I'd forgotten! And FWIW I still use the M8 8-bit files and banding and noise can be relatively low even so with careful post processing - I'm sure that bla's system is better and one day I will get my act together and try it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenshacker Posted January 23, 2015 Share #25 Posted January 23, 2015 (edited) As difficult as it was for me to believe: Using M8 RAW and DNG-16, it's best to leave the camera set to ISO160, Underexpose 3, 4, even 5 stops, and "Push" the acquired data in Post-Processing. Think of it as under-exposing Tri-X and push-processing, you are pulling the details out of the shadows. C'mon guys! Underexposing, and then boosting the image with processing, is a PUSH! Not a "Pull". Same as it is for film. "Pulling" your processing is to OVEREXPOSE, and then reduce the brightness in the processing. You PULL details from shadows. With film, you call it push-processing, where you are basically over-developing the negative to make up for underexposure. With Digital- its common to say "pulled details from the shadows", the left portion of the histogram. Basically, you are applying a weighted curve to the intensity values of the image. Edited January 23, 2015 by Lenshacker Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted January 23, 2015 Share #26 Posted January 23, 2015 Well, it's the international forum, so I guess you are free to make up your own language.... But in English, "pulling" an exposure means overexposing, and then correcting with the processing. As in Leica's ISO settings for an M9 or M240 - "Pull 80" or "Pull 100". Extra exposure with processing correction - the opposite of what you are doing. Note that I don't have any problem with your technique itself - I used it myself with the Digilux 2 to bypass PanaLeica's automatic detail-killing jpeg noise reduction at anything above base ISO. But it was "pushing." Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bla Posted January 23, 2015 Author Share #27 Posted January 23, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Thanks however for clearing that up. But let's not delve into semantics, this was supposed to be a thread about high ISO images of the M8, images be pushed or pulled or dragged and kicked. Let's see some of your high ISO shots! - Arvid Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenshacker Posted January 23, 2015 Share #28 Posted January 23, 2015 Well, it's the international forum, so I guess you are free to make up your own language.... But in English, "pulling" an exposure means overexposing, and then correcting with the processing. As in Leica's ISO settings for an M9 or M240 - "Pull 80" or "Pull 100". Extra exposure with processing correction - the opposite of what you are doing. Note that I don't have any problem with your technique itself - I used it myself with the Digilux 2 to bypass PanaLeica's automatic detail-killing jpeg noise reduction at anything above base ISO. But it was "pushing." I'm surprised that you've never read the phrase "Pull details out of the shadows", it's been used on this forum for quite a while- especially after the M Monochrom came out. I've been using that term since the 1980s, image processing on a Gould Deanza IP8500. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenshacker Posted January 24, 2015 Share #29 Posted January 24, 2015 (edited) Another at ISO1250 equivalent- no NR used. Marine Corp Museum, M8 I've done some side-by-side comparisons with the M9. My M8 is late-production, original sale date was October 2009. According to the original Kodak datasheets, the M8 sensor has double the "Dark Current" of the M9 sensor. I suspect the sensor was improved throughout it's production. Another at ISO1250 eqv. skate10_ISO1250 And- just for Comparison- this is with the M9 at ISO1250: Skating- M9 and 50/1.1Nokton For processing terminology, the closest "analog" for processing the histogram is probably "Pull-up Resistor" and "Pull-down Resistor", for "pull-higher" and "pull-lower". The x-axis of the Histogram is a digital representation of output voltage of the sensor, left side is ~ground (DC offset with respect to ground) and right side is Vsat(uration). Edited January 24, 2015 by Lenshacker 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bla Posted January 26, 2015 Author Share #30 Posted January 26, 2015 And two from today, same processing as usual.. Shot at ISO 160, then push in LR 5.7, color noise reduction only, no luminance noise reduction. Again, I cordially invite every M8 user to show some of his/her high ISO results. Preferably taken with the M8... - Arvid Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/240074-m8-hideous-unusable-high-iso-performance-thread/?do=findComment&comment=2753252'>More sharing options...
H. James Wolf Posted January 27, 2015 Share #31 Posted January 27, 2015 Backing up Loren's plea. How about a step-by-step. I have tried this, interpolating from the thread images, and have had some success. I'm sure it could be improved with some much-needed help. BTW, when I really need high ISO, I go to a Canon DSLR, but I would like to be able to use the M8 in available darkness. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bla Posted January 28, 2015 Author Share #32 Posted January 28, 2015 Of course I'd like to help others getting good high ISO results from their M8. That's why I felt like creating this thread. To raise some awareness for the poor little M8. Although right now I am not sure if my results are good compared to what others get as a) there's not much feedback on Brian's or my images and no one posts their high ISO shots for comparison. So at the moment I am not inclined to write up a detailed article if the readers here can't even get themselves up to participate a little bit. - Arvid Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted January 29, 2015 Share #33 Posted January 29, 2015 Of course I'd like to help others getting good high ISO results from their M8. That's why I felt like creating this thread. To raise some awareness for the poor little M8. Although right now I am not sure if my results are good compared to what others get as a) there's not much feedback [...] Perhaps M8 owners are under-represented. Perhaps they are settled and happy enough. It could be that simple. . 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
T44ISKN Posted January 29, 2015 Share #34 Posted January 29, 2015 Of course I'd like to help others getting good high ISO results from their M8. That's why I felt like creating this thread. To raise some awareness for the poor little M8. Although right now I am not sure if my results are good compared to what others get as a) there's not much feedback on Brian's or my images and no one posts their high ISO shots for comparison. So at the moment I am not inclined to write up a detailed article if the readers here can't even get themselves up to participate a little bit. - Arvid As a fairly new owner of a m8.2, I'm interested and keen to get involved. I've recently bought a Ricoh GR to use in low light situations, frustrated by the performance of the Leica above ISO 640. However, I'm sure I can get more out of it. I'm truly grateful for the work that Arvid has done in making his RAW tool available, but I find the button dance on the camera tedious and would prefer to avoid this extra step if at all possible. I'd be interested to know if anyone has any thoughts on boosting exposure in post, versus raising the ISO in-camera. Are there any Signal to Noise Ratio benefits from shooting in ISO 640 and then boosting by 2EV in post, versus shooting at ISO 160 and pushing 4 stops in post? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
H. James Wolf Posted January 29, 2015 Share #35 Posted January 29, 2015 Arvid, I do appreciate the work you and others have shown. I do not have the ability to share photos on the net at this time, so I have not been able to contribute. My M8 is the only digital rangefinder I have; it accompanies my film Ms. I understand your reluctance, but a bit of help would be appreciated. Jim Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenshacker Posted January 29, 2015 Share #36 Posted January 29, 2015 The M8 RAW files lose bits as you boost the ISO. It's basically bit shifting the value, and is done to improve the compression algorithm for DNG-8. The M9 does not do this. SO- leave the ISO at 160 and boost in post. You also have the added advantage of preserving highlights, you can use Photoshop Curves to boost the shadow area. Next time I have the M8 out (should be this weekend) I'll try the added options in M8RAW2DNG and do a step by step. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
satijntje Posted January 29, 2015 Share #37 Posted January 29, 2015 So at the moment I am not inclined to write up a detailed article if the readers here can't even get themselves up to participate a little bit. - Arvid Arvid, I can assure you that your work is really appreciated, and discussed worldwide! I got my M8.2 also only 2 weeks ago, and need to find some time to go out for shooting. Please keep up your excellent work on this, you are a real pioneer with a unique project! I will post some work soon, promised! John Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
T44ISKN Posted January 29, 2015 Share #38 Posted January 29, 2015 The M8 RAW files lose bits as you boost the ISO. It's basically bit shifting the value, and is done to improve the compression algorithm for DNG-8. The M9 does not do this. SO- leave the ISO at 160 and boost in post. You also have the added advantage of preserving highlights, you can use Photoshop Curves to boost the shadow area. Next time I have the M8 out (should be this weekend) I'll try the added options in M8RAW2DNG and do a step by step. Thanks - would appreciate that. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenshacker Posted February 1, 2015 Share #39 Posted February 1, 2015 (edited) I met a friend at the Marine Museum today, took the M8 along with the Minolta 50/1.4. I'm processing some of the files, used Raw mode and shot base ISO at -3ev (ISO1250), and on manual at -4ev (ISO2500) and even -5ev (ISO5000). Here is one example at -5ev, or ISO5000 equivalent: autocurves_ISO5000eqv ISO160_minus5 Wish I could tell you that I did all sorts of fancy processing to pull the image out of the shadows. Custom NR, custom signal processing, etc. autocurves_easy I clicked "auto-Levels". That's it. Then made it 8-bit, and resized. ANYWAY! I will write up a step-by-step of using RAW Mode, Arvid's M8RAW2DNG, LR, and Photoshop to get to this point. This represents a process to squeeze an extra 1.5~2 stops out of the M8. Edited February 1, 2015 by Lenshacker Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenshacker Posted February 1, 2015 Share #40 Posted February 1, 2015 (edited) The lighting was changing constantly for this display. I'm calling this -6ev or so. The original: original Pulling out an image from that shadow. monochrome1 Not enough color information, so I used channel mixer in Photoshop. No NR used. Edited February 1, 2015 by Lenshacker Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.