If a product isn't labeled as HDR, if it does enough "stops" is it "HDR"?

I think there is not really a hdr camera/sensor also people say cameras with 14/16+ stops of dynamic range / 10 bit are supposed to give you the minimum source material quality. Hdr is a colour space that can display a way brighter image (10x ?)  and capturing more dynamic range and more bit depth helps to do that. Please correct me if i am wrong!

Flo the Pirate Posted at 7-24 07:00
I think there is not really a hdr camera/sensor also people say cameras with 14/16+ stops of dynamic range / 10 bit are supposed to give you the minimum source material quality. Hdr is a colour space that can display a way brighter image (10x ?)  and capturing more dynamic range and more bit depth helps to do that. Please correct me if i am wrong!

This is complex issue, but usually modern digital cameras with huge sensors are capable to deliver image of High Dynamic Range. Which - in plain English - means that the image contains enough information and detail in either brightly lighted and shadowed parts of the frame. Bigger size of sensor not necessarily translates to huge resolution, but to better elimination of noise and light-reading interferences. That's why truly professional filming cameras are equipped with big sensors. I would consider 10-12 stops of dynamic range as decent enough for average landscape photography. For example, ARRI Alexa's Super 35 sensor has 4448 x 3096 photosites (pixels?). It is therefore "only" a 4.5K sensor measuring 36.70 x 25.54 mm, but able to "see" 14 stops of dynamic range, if memory serves me well. That said, Zenmuse X5R/X5S class cameras are decent enough for HDR imagery, while X7 will shine here.

Matthew Dobrski Posted at 7-24 13:26
This is complex issue, but usually modern digital cameras with huge sensors are capable to deliver image of High Dynamic Range. Which - in plain English - means that the image contains enough information and detail in either brightly lighted and shadowed parts of the frame. Bigger size of sensor not necessarily translates to huge resolution, but to better elimination of noise and light-reading interferences. That's why truly professional filming cameras are equipped with big sensors. I would consider 10-12 stops of dynamic range as decent enough for average landscape photography. For example, ARRI Alexa's Super 35 sensor has 4448 x 3096 photosites (pixels?). It is therefore "only" a 4.5K sensor measuring 36.70 x 25.54 mm, but able to "see" 14 stops of dynamic range, if memory serves me well. That said, Zenmuse X5R/X5S class cameras are decent enough for HDR imagery, while X7 will shine here.

So 14 stops = HDR?

AntDX316 Posted at 7-24 20:18
So 14 stops = HDR?

haha ... it´s not the same (=) ;) ..... hdr is how you display your images , it´s about your monitoring and how bright it can display in nits and therefor it is important that your footage is graded in the right colour space (e.g. NOT rec709 but rec 2020) that includes 10x brighter pixels.

you can still display/grade e.g your inspire shots with 14 stops in a rec709 and a rec2020 timeline and as Mat said ... yes it´s a complex topic I am also not too comfortable to get in a deep discussion ;)

Flo the Pirate Posted at 7-25 04:13
haha ... it´s not the same (=) ;) ..... hdr is how you display your images , it´s about your monitoring and how bright it can display in nits and therefor it is important that your footage is graded in the right colour space (e.g. NOT rec709 but rec 2020) that includes 10x brighter pixels.

you can still display/grade e.g your inspire shots with 14 stops in a rec709 and a rec2020 timeline and as Mat said ... yes it´s a complex topic I am also not too comfortable to get in a deep discussion ;)

What is the best way to have a high dynamic range w/o overblowing parts of the image?

AntDX316 Posted at 7-25 05:23
What is the best way to have a high dynamic range w/o overblowing parts of the image?

do you mean blowing out the highlights ? Just watch your histogram while shooting and don´t clip anything on the right - that´s the highlights ... this might be a good advice as long you don´t have the sun in your shot as everything else might get way under exposed when not clipping the sun

Flo the Pirate Posted at 7-25 06:29
do you mean blowing out the highlights ? Just watch your histogram while shooting and don´t clip anything on the right - that´s the highlights ... this might be a good advice as long you don´t have the sun in your shot as everything else might get way under exposed when not clipping the sun

Yeah but some situations are where the right or left is so over the limit that even at -5 or +5 EV it will still be maxed on either side.  I like using the Zebras but the Zebra limit is set too low that if you have Zero zebras you underexpose other things that are impossible to recover.

I don't think it is that exact.
You usually need multiple exposures for a true HDR image.
But I'm not sure if that is the exact definition.

AntDX316 Posted at 7-25 05:23
What is the best way to have a high dynamic range w/o overblowing parts of the image?

For start, record your footage in D-Cinelike colour space with properly determined WB. Install the footage in decent grading software (i.e. Davinci Resolve) and experiment with 4 thumb wheels  on Color page (Lift, Gamma, Gain and Offset) to your liking. Try to avoid using other settings below wheels (i.e. Contrast, Saturation, Color Boost, Temp, Tint) unless absolutely necessary. Practice, practice and practice more, since you need a lot of it ...

Matthew Dobrski Posted at 7-25 13:14
For start, record your footage in D-Cinelike colour space with properly determined WB. Install the footage in decent grading software (i.e. Davinci Resolve) and experiment with 4 thumb wheels  on Color page (Lift, Gamma, Gain and Offset) to your liking. Try to avoid using other settings below wheels (i.e. Contrast, Saturation, Color Boost, Temp, Tint) unless absolutely necessary. Practice, practice and practice more, since you need a lot of it  ...

How do you color boost?

AntDX316 Posted at 7-25 13:47
How do you color boost?

Ant, I don't mind to share my knowledge with others, but anybody attending my class must do some homework. Google and YTube are your best friends, there's tons of tutorials about colour grading in Davinci Resolve. I gave you basic idea, don't be lazy ...

You'll find two sets of additional parameters to make more radical color corrections. At the bottom, just below Color Wheels, on the very left you'll see White Balance eyedropper, letter A and two buttons numbered 1 and 2. These buttons will let you access two sets of parameters, second is containing Color Boost, called a Vibrance in PP (form of Saturation) ...

Matthew Dobrski Posted at 7-25 19:09
Ant, I don't mind to share my knowledge with others, but anybody attending my class must do some homework. Google and YTube are your best friends, there's tons of tutorials about colour grading in Davinci Resolve. I gave you basic idea, don't be lazy ...

You'll find two sets of additional parameters to make more radical color corrections. At the bottom, just below Color Wheels, on the very left you'll see White Balance eyedropper, letter A and two buttons numbered 1 and 2. These buttons will let you access two sets of parameters, second is containing Color Boost, called a Vibrance in PP (form of Saturation) ...

I went from Resolve to Premiere.

AntDX316 Posted at 7-25 10:22
Yeah but some situations are where the right or left is so over the limit that even at -5 or +5 EV it will still be maxed on either side.  I like using the Zebras but the Zebra limit is set too low that if you have Zero zebras you underexpose other things that are impossible to recover.

if the dynamic range of your scene exceeds your sensor dynamic range and you are clipping left or right of your histogram you can shoot in log format . I strictly use the histogram to judge exposure .

Montfrooij Posted at 7-25 12:59
I don't think it is that exact.
You usually need multiple exposures for a true HDR image.
But I'm not sure if that is the exact definition.

Now I am confused , I thought we talking motion picture not stills. You are right in stills HDR is achieved by  sandwiching/blending the same shot captured in different exposures , in motion picturesthis workflow is not possible - only if you have a red that can record two exposures at the same time ( but it´s not working that great )

Matthew Dobrski Posted at 7-25 13:14
For start, record your footage in D-Cinelike colour space with properly determined WB. Install the footage in decent grading software (i.e. Davinci Resolve) and experiment with 4 thumb wheels  on Color page (Lift, Gamma, Gain and Offset) to your liking. Try to avoid using other settings below wheels (i.e. Contrast, Saturation, Color Boost, Temp, Tint) unless absolutely necessary. Practice, practice and practice more, since you need a lot of it  ...

there are so many ways to achieve a good and almost same result in davinci what´s really great ! For my taste as I don´t have hardware colour wheels I never touch them just with a mouse maybe just a little to warm some part of the image but the most work I do by using the sliders beneath it to spread out the (again) histogram from all the way from left (lift slider) to right (gain slider) and then use the gamma slider to push the exposure to my liking. I also like using the curves to do a similar effect as you can trim exposure more accurate in different parts of the picture. In motion pictures I consider HDR to us the full range of the histogram (+ more vibrant colour and lots of contrast and detail)  and that starts (especially in davinci ;)) with choosing the right timeline settings first (rec 2020) and having the right monitoring to even see what you are doing.

colour is an art so yes - practice , practice , practice !

Matthew Dobrski Posted at 7-25 19:09
Ant, I don't mind to share my knowledge with others, but anybody attending my class must do some homework. Google and YTube are your best friends, there's tons of tutorials about colour grading in Davinci Resolve. I gave you basic idea, don't be lazy ...

You'll find two sets of additional parameters to make more radical color corrections. At the bottom, just below Color Wheels, on the very left you'll see White Balance eyedropper, letter A and two buttons numbered 1 and 2. These buttons will let you access two sets of parameters, second is containing Color Boost, called a Vibrance in PP (form of Saturation) ...

he´s probably trolling us ;)

AntDX316 Posted at 7-25 21:09
I went from Resolve to Premiere.

bad choice if you are working with dng sequences

Flo the Pirate Posted at 7-26 01:42
bad choice if you are working with dng sequences

How come?  I max out the CBR bitrate so I basically lose no detail loss in Premiere on the render.

AntDX316 Posted at 7-26 01:45
How come?  I max out the CBR bitrate so I basically lose no detail loss in Premiere on the render.

I am more talking about real time playback what you needed as soon you start more advanced colour correction e.g. grading parts of the picture with power windows and qualifiers , at least with my set up I can grade several nodes and add noise reduction in davinci while premiere stutters playing back the untouched file. This is solely the problem of premiere being badly coded an not maxing out the hardware.

I heard best quality picture comes out of after effects but same thing here - no real time playback

AntDX316 Posted at 7-25 21:09
I went from Resolve to Premiere.

Than Color Boost in Resolve will be Vibrance in PP, but still this is your last approach to subtly enhance colours ...

Flo the Pirate Posted at 7-26 06:23
I am more talking about real time playback what you needed as soon you start more advanced colour correction e.g. grading parts of the picture with power windows and qualifiers , at least with my set up I can grade several nodes and add noise reduction in davinci while premiere stutters playing back the untouched file. This is solely the problem of premiere being badly coded an not maxing out the hardware.

I heard best quality picture comes out of after effects but same thing here - no real time playback

Yeah, that's the main reason for using Davinci! The debate about advantages of both PP and Resolve will never end, but indeed the playback is a big plus on Blackmagic side. Dealing with proxies in PP is a PITA. Why is that remains a mystery ...

Flo the Pirate Posted at 7-26 01:16
Now I am confused , I thought we talking motion picture not stills. You are right in stills HDR is achieved by  sandwiching/blending the same shot captured in different exposures , in motion picturesthis workflow is not possible - only if you have a red that can record two exposures at the same time ( but it´s not working that great )

You might be right!

Matthew Dobrski Posted at 7-26 11:20
Than Color Boost in Resolve will be Vibrance in PP, but still this is your last approach to subtly enhance colours ...

I just shoot in Color Profile - none and it comes out great.

Flo the Pirate Posted at 7-26 01:12
if the dynamic range of your scene exceeds your sensor dynamic range and you are clipping left or right of your histogram you can shoot in log format . I strictly use the histogram to judge exposure .

I should start to do that.  The problem is when you are clipping, but the details are still there.  The problem is when you remove all Zebras from the image; you underexpose parts of the image extensively.  It would be better if you can adjust the Zebra settings, so it isn't set too low as it is now.

Matthew Dobrski Posted at 7-26 11:33
Yeah, that's the main reason for using Davinci! The debate about advantages of both PP and Resolve will never end, but indeed the playback is a big plus on Blackmagic side. Dealing with proxies in PP is a PITA. Why is that remains a mystery ...

Not sure if OP is using dng raws as this definitely causing the main problem for adobe in this workflow ... i would call it bad coding on adobes side as more cores and gpu are hardly used and only mhz on view cores seem to count , drives peaking at 10% utilisation ... the bottleneck is obviously caused by not properly taking advantage of the all hardware - if you don´t see any utilisation pegging one of your components at 100% the bottleneck is the software ....

I wish more people would complain to adobe. You can pay of a davinci resolve studio licence  in about 5-6 month renting adobe suite  - davinci will be free from than on Problem is you still want pp probably for editing and ae for warp-stabiliser as davinci can´t match that ... yet

Matt are you doing your editing in davinci yet , I am not an editor so it´s hard for me to understand if things are advanced enough in davinci ?

AntDX316 Posted at 7-26 14:06
I should start to do that.  The problem is when you are clipping, but the details are still there.  The problem is when you remove all Zebras from the image; you underexpose parts of the image extensively.  It would be better if you can adjust the Zebra settings, so it isn't set too low as it is now.

yeah ! Turn off the zebras and turn on the histogram all time ( you can move it on your screen to a good position so it doesn´t distract you but watch it all time ) ! Expose to the right but never clip the highlights (only the inner circle of the sun if you have to ) and all will be good ! The histogram should be evenly spread out. Shoot raw and log if you need it ! I have to say shooting x7 in full frame 6k really gives you an amazing picture - things have unbelievably evolved !

Flo the Pirate Posted at 7-26 14:14
Not sure if OP is using dng raws as this definitely causing the main problem for adobe in this workflow ... i would call it bad coding  on adobes side as more cores and gpu are hardly used and only mhz on view cores seem to count , drives peaking at 10% utilisation  ... the bottleneck is obviously caused by not properly taking advantage of the all hardware - if you don´t see any utilisation pegging one of your components at 100% the bottleneck is the software ....

I wish more people would complain to adobe. You can pay of a davinci resolve studio licence  in about 5-6 month renting adobe suite  - davinci will be free from than on  Problem is you still want pp probably for editing and ae for warp-stabiliser as davinci can´t match that ... yet  

I'm Adobe guy since early ages in digital photography and I'm still a subscriber, because Adobe package does many other things that Resolve can't. But when it comes to video no-fancy postproduction, even free, stripped down copy of Resolve is simply unbeatable in efficiency. I've discovered that not too long ago when begun dealing with 4K DNG footage. PP workflow with proxies is a chore I'm not really willing to play with. Resolve has different GUI, abbreviations and approach for editing, but is offering basically the same quality results, if not better. After few weeks of learning (still in progress) I can jump between both easily ...

AntDX316 Posted at 7-26 13:25
I just shoot in Color Profile - none and it comes out great.

Probably, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the topic of this thread.

Matthew Dobrski Posted at 7-26 17:06
Probably, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the topic of this thread.

If you get the HLG/D-Log or any of the profiles wrong you will have insane amounts of noise.

AntDX316 Posted at 7-26 20:32
If you get the HLG/D-Log or any of the profiles wrong you will have insane amounts of noise.

Thank you for sharing this revelation with us. Yes, you're correct: the idea is to get everything just right ...

Matthew Dobrski Posted at 7-27 08:45
Thank you for sharing this revelation with us. Yes, you're correct: the idea is to get everything just right ...

I need to practice some D-Log and HLG today before it gets dark to mess with.

Matthew Dobrski Posted at 7-27 08:45
Thank you for sharing this revelation with us. Yes, you're correct: the idea is to get everything just right ...

HLG and D-log are difficult to get right and using a LUT you don't have (that probably doesn't exist) to make it perfect than None takes way too much time and looks worse.

AntDX316 Posted at 7-28 22:38
HLG and D-log are difficult to get right and using a LUT you don't have (that probably doesn't exist) to make it perfect than None takes way too much time and looks worse.

It's because you don't listen to anybody else but yourself! D-log is a colour space for most experienced graders in film industry and I didn't suggest it. If you wan't to preserve HDR of your footage easy way, use D-Cinelike instead and experiment with grading without any pre-formatted LUTs, as most of them are developed for particular professional camera or for particular mood of image an artist want to achieve. Finally, if you like None, suit yourself and stop bothering us about HDR, definition of which is escaping your ability to understand, I'm afraid ...

Matthew Dobrski Posted at 7-29 15:19
It's because you don't listen to anybody else but yourself! D-log is a colour space for most experienced graders in film industry and I didn't suggest it. If you wan't to preserve HDR of your footage easy way, use D-Cinelike instead and experiment with grading without any pre-formatted LUTs, as most of them are developed for particular professional camera or for particular mood of image an artist want to achieve. Finally, if you like None, suit yourself and stop bothering us about HDR, definition of which is escaping your ability to understand, I'm afraid ...

Mavic 2 Pro only has HLG and D-Log, no D-Cinelike.

AntDX316 Posted at 7-29 17:03
Mavic 2 Pro only has HLG and D-Log, no D-Cinelike.

And what Mavic 2 Pro has to do with X7 camera and it's High Dynamic Range? BTW, Mavic 2 Pro is capable of recording 3840×2160 10-bit 4K Dlog-M and 4K HDR 10-bit videos at 100 Mbps. Unfortunately with NONE you're successfully eliminating benefits of HDR recording at the source. Therefore your videos looks exactly like 6 millions iPhone videos on YT: colourful, bright and shiny, but with - perhaps - 8 stops of dynamic range. Honestly, I don't even know what Dlog-M is offering and how it behaves in colour grading of H.264 codec.

Matthew Dobrski Posted at 7-29 20:46
And what Mavic 2 Pro has to do with X7 camera and it's High Dynamic Range? BTW, Mavic 2 Pro is capable of recording 3840×2160 10-bit 4K Dlog-M and 4K HDR 10-bit videos at 100 Mbps. Unfortunately with NONE you're successfully eliminating benefits of HDR recording at the source. Therefore your videos looks exactly like 6 millions iPhone videos on YT: colourful, bright and shiny, but with - perhaps - 8 stops of dynamic range. Honestly, I don't even know what Dlog-M is offering and how it behaves in colour grading of H.264 codec.

How many stops you lose with None instead of D-Log/HLG?

Use HLG or D-log?

HLG is for uneditted footage like None but when played back in Hybrid Log-Gamma, it will display HDR?  D-Log is basically like shooting in RAW vs JPEG?

None

HLG

D-Log


If you have an HDR monitor you can see the HD letters by the settings wheel saying HDR.  Screenshotting in HDR mode makes it look like crap but on the monitor, it's not.

How many stops you lose with None instead of D-Log/HLG?
I can only estimate approx. 4 stops.

Use HLG or D-log?
I don't know since I have no experience with Mavic 2 Pro whatsoever.

HLG is for uneditted footage like None but when played back in Hybrid Log-Gamma, it will display HDR?  D-Log is basically like shooting in RAW vs JPEG?
No, D-Log is just a flattened image with minimal contrast and saturation. Minimal contrast means more details is preserved in shadowed and brightly illuminated parts of image. IMHO, shooting D-Log with H.264/265 codec is rather senseless since the ability to properly colour grade in post is very limited. Again, D-Log colour space may be desired for particular effects in movies, but only when shot in RAW format. Which Mavic 2 Pro is not offering ...

In the age of the "instant expert", here's my two penneth!

The HDR acronym, I belive,  applies to executing multiple takes of each individual photograph (or frame of an image sequence) which are then composited to produce a higher dynamic range image than the camera is capable of. I don't think that this would necessarily be done using RAW images.

A camera (sensor) having a high dynamic range is a different thing.  It is simply a subjective assessment of the camera's dynamic range, presumably compared with other cameras. This would normally be expressed in "stops" or EV (exposure value) increments.  

The dynamic range of an image (as perceived by the viewer) will be dependent upon a series of limitations imposed by the production and post production processes, culminating with further limitations created by the final viewing method, together with ambient lghting conditions and the background surrounding the displayed image (ask any colourist!).

Like the other contributors to this thread, I quote no references - just opinions!

So ifnally, just for interest here are some google results -

Human Eye                                   20
X7                                                  <14
Red Mx                                         >13
5DMk3                                            12
Film (low iso neg)                            8
Early SD Video camera (JVC D9)  5 or 6
Film (fast reversal                           5

GeoffG Posted at 8-5 23:50
In the age of the "instant expert", here's my two penneth!

The HDR acronym, I belive,  applies to executing multiple takes of each individual photograph (or frame of an image sequence) which are then composited to produce a higher dynamic range image than the camera is capable of. I don't think that this would necessarily be done using RAW images.

What does > and < mean.  Greater or less than?

Has any camera been able to capture greater than 20?