CI Impressions of Phase One Dual Exposure + and New Firmware 7 for IQ4

[Steve Hendrix]

I have yet to see a small icon indicating FA. I would like to see that first as it should be easy to implement.

There is. But not yet for DE+.


Steve Hendrix/CI

 

[Dante Alighieri]

Thank you for your contributions here, Steve.

You're really just a swell guy.

And no matter what that Dave Gallagher guy says, Dante likes you.

--Dante

 

[algrove]

View attachment 147716


There is. But not yet for DE+.


Steve Hendrix/CI

Thanks Steve.
I must have a FW that does not have that icon in it.

 

[GrahamWelland]

Btw, as many of us have said, we care less about pixel resolution vs DR. I’ll take more DR every day vs pixel resolution.

 

[vjbelle]

We sure don't need more pixels unless Sony can figure out a way to do it without making the pixels smaller. More DR, color fidelity, noise control and computational capabilities would be much more beneficial from MPOV.

Victor B

 

[GrahamWelland]

We sure don't need more pixels unless Sony can figure out a way to do it without making the pixels smaller. More DR, color fidelity, noise control and computational capabilities would be much more beneficial from MPOV.

Victor B

+1 on that

and don’t tie it to the XT!

 

[dchew]

One thing I learned shooting over the weekend: When in DE+ mode, the back switches from EX to "DE+" format. If you shut off the back while on the screen in DE+ mode, it will kick out of your EX file selection, and revert to IIQL 16bit (no EX).

I created a case yesterday. Jon already responded they are aware and working on it.

Dave

 

[Wayne Fox]

Btw, as many of us have said, we care less about pixel resolution vs DR. I’ll take more DR every day vs pixel resolution.

More DR

Victor B

interesting perspective. So much dynamic range now ... I haven't shot an HDR in years.

As far as making the sensels smaller, I think they could be made a lot smaller ... but with a different strategy. Micro LED displays are the current rave, possibly to eliminate OLED at some future time. What about a micro-LED sensor ... where 4 micro sensels are binned to make 1. Seems pixel binning can be powerful in both dynamic range and color fidelity, and even in perceived resolution because of a reduction of artifacts, since such as sensor wouldn't require de-mosaicing. Not sure if it's possible and to what level ... and maybe there's even a better technology out there that will eliminate the need of filter arrays and allow recording each pixel accurately.

random thoughts from a sleepy mind ... I need to go to bed :loco:

 

[Paul2660]

I have noticed one issue:

When you push up dark shadows (basically deep blacks), you may see a slight color change, in my case areas that are brown may take on a slight green cast. I have realized also you have to view the image at 100% to really see the true file.

This only seems to happen with areas of a file that were basically black or close to it, so I realize I am pushing up the file an extreme amount.

For my testing I have always have the back's WB set to Landscape. (I can't remember if it's Landscape or outdoors).

Paul C

 

[dchew]

Paul,
If you mean Daylight, that is what I do too.

 

[vjbelle]

FWIW I also use 'Daylight' for my WB preset when using DE+...

Victor B

 

[Paul2660]

Thanks.

Daylight.

Paul C

 

[dchew]

Here is the response from Phase One in regards to EX format when using DE+:

Hi Dave,

The file format could change if the back is powered off (or otherwise loses power) when the Dual Exposure screen in up. Part of the reason is that Dual exposure does not support "Extended" readout mode from the sensor - essentially Extended readout mode used in IIQ16 EX and Dual Readout used in Dual Exposure are two different operational modes of the 150mp BSI sensor. Therefore when entering Dual Exposure, the back has to change file formats in the background. This wil be returned when you exit the tool normally, but when powering down it seems the previous mode is not saved.

We have of course reported this to R&D so we can track and correct it.​

Dave

 

[Paul2660]

Has anyone else worked with Dual exposure with images that have very dark, or next to black parts of the file?

So far I am finding that the dual exposure image will pull out quite a bit of details, albeit with banding. I will try to post some examples in a bit.

I am still very impressed with the overall recovery and image quality. I also noted the these same areas where you are pushing very hard on shadow recovery, when you edit the image in CC or process it out in C1, the actual color in these area may take on a different hue, in my case a bit of green, where there should have been brown.

As this is still a beta tool, I hope P1 will look into this and see if there is a way to work on it before they take the tool out of beta to full feature.

Paul C

 

[f8orbust]

I don't have an IQ4150, but generally noise halves with every extra stop of exposure, and my understanding is that the technique works best with 4 stops of exposure difference between two images, and the first image has to literally be on the cusp of clipping the highlights for best results. When done correctly, noise is eliminated (at least, in all the examples I have seen). Phase One has chosen a 3 stop difference (IIRC) so the exposure of the first image has to be nailed. Even then, that may not be enough in some circumstances and 3 images may be better (IIRC Luijk finally settled on a 3 image workflow when he developed zero noise). It's not clear either what difference an ES may make to the whole thing (if any). It would be easy for P1 to allow the user to select the exposure difference between the two images via a firmware update (if they can't already), and even better they could allow them to choose the number of exposures taken in the sequence (e.g. +2EV, 0, -2EV).

 

[Reginald Fluggelding]

One thing I learned shooting over the weekend: When in DE+ mode, the back switches from EX to "DE+" format. If you shut off the back while on the screen in DE+ mode, it will kick out of your EX file selection, and revert to IIQL 16bit (no EX).

I created a case yesterday. Jon already responded they are aware and working on it.

Dave

I don't think they have fixed this. I wondered why my files keep coming up as IIQL 16bit (no EX).

Obviously this is a pretty old post but I was looking at it since I've discovered some horrible artefacts that occur in DE + shots and was searching for some answers. From my initial testing it seems to be due to shifts in lighting sometime during the two exposures. It means patches of spotty blotchy transitions (almost posterised) in areas of flat colour (like a wall), and sometimes harsh speckled patches in highlight/specular highlights. It changes from frame to frame. C1 is doing a terrible job of rendering the transition in these cases. I discovered that if the file is opened in Camera Raw only the short exposure is accessed and the artefacts are not present, so there should be a way to de-merge the short and long exposures and blend manually if such artefacts occur. Originally I had them in some files from a job I shot — I shoot tethered but in the heat of the moment had not noticed them.

The artefacts are still present in the exported files.

I've attached an example. It's just a screenshot so the colours are whack. It's most obvious in the OOF areas. These are two consecutive frames both shot with exactly the same settings. The artefacts are visible even without any adjustments. It's just a test I did in my office. Yes I have a drum kit in my office.

 

[dchew]

I’m pretty sure Steve Hendrix told me the switch away from EX when using DE+ is by design.

No idea what is causing your artifacts. I haven’t noticed that, but most of my subject matter would make something like that hard to see.
Dave

 

[Reginald Fluggelding]

I’m pretty sure Steve Hendrix told me the switch away from EX when using DE+ is by design.

No idea what is causing your artifacts. I haven’t noticed that, but most of my subject matter would make something like that hard to see.
Dave

Thanks Dave. I'll just have to keep it in mind in the future.

I'm getting the dealer here to file a report with Phase One about the other issue. I think it's software related though. I can't access the longer exposure by itself to check but the short exposure is fine if a little noisy when the exposure is corrected. It actually looks similar to the kind of effect that happens when using the HDR merge feature in C1 — which from my experience is mostly a failure and produces nasty transitions: see attached
.