 |
| EC 0 adjusted in PsCR This is a JPG from the adjusted RAW file |
Malleable-- "Able to be hammered or pressed into shape without breaking or cracking".
Synonyms: Pliable, workable.
When I started using the FZ1000 I was concerned that the small (8.8x13.2mm, diagonal 15.9mm) sensor (presumably made by Sony, although I have seen no official confirmation of this from any source), would produce brittle RAW files unable to be manipulated in Photoshop Camera Raw without seriously disrupting picture quality.
In the past it has been my experience that the smaller sensors have this problem.
But Sony (presumably) and Panasonic have created a winning combination with the FZ1000. In practice the files respond very well to considerable manipulation in PsCR.
Specifically there is considerable capacity to pull in overexposed highlights and to lift underexposed dark tones.
By way of example I present 2 versions of a photo of the Strand Arcade in Sydney. As a test subject this has several advantages, one being that management allows photography. The other for the present purpose is the high subject brightness range. Even though the interior is well lit it is much darker than the glasss roof in direct spring sunshine and the high rise buildings beyond.
I made one set of pictures at the exposure indicated by the camera in Multiple Metering Mode, then just as an experiment made other exposures at minus 1.66 stops, then ran them all through Photoshop Camera Raw.
 |
| EC 0 Before adjustment. This might not look terribly promising but the file responded well to adjustments in PsCR leading to the photo at the top of the post. |
 |
| EC - 1.66 EV Before adjustment. This might appear terminally underexposed with no hope of recovery but see the adjusted version below |
 |
| EC -1.66 EV after some fairly extreme slider adjustments in PsCR. Tonally it's not bad with more detail in the roof area than the picture at the top of the post. But the lower part of the picture is quite grainy with reduced color fidelity and tonal gradation. |
There is some cost to this however.
Highlights pulled down a lot are liable to exhibit chromatic aberration (correctable in PsCR), purple fringing (correctable in PsCR) and a phenomenon which I call "edging". This shows as a halo or edge around highlight subject elements and cannot be removed in CR.
Strongly lifted dark tones exhibit increased digital noise appearing as grain. More lifting leads to more grain. In addition these lifted tones lose contrast, color saturation and color fidelity. These problems can in many cases be at least partly improved in CR and/or by subsequent manipulation in Photoshop.
So there is no free lunch. There is a price to pay when FZ1000 RAW files are "hammered and pressed" in Adobe Camera Raw.
But as long as this is not taken to extremes, I find the results quite acceptable even when output as a large print. On that subject I remind readers that grain is less evident and/or less objectionable in prints than in pictures viewed at 100% or even 200% for IQ tragics, on a monitor.
In practical terms I find that even in situations with high subject brightness range RAW capture works best with exposure at or close to the camera recommended settings using Multiple Metering Mode. In extreme cases application of minus 0.33 or 0.66 EV steps could be beneficial.
With RAW capture I have found it is not necessary or even desirable to dial down the exposure so as to remove blinking Zebras even when these are set, as I have them, to 105%.
This capability adds to the already considerable appeal of the FZ1000 as an all purpose photographic tool.
The management of JPG capture in subjects with high brightness range is different as I will discuss in the next post.
Đăng nhận xét