Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

That's just really a completely misguided statement. No mater how much you fumble with aperture and shutter speed there's simply no way to expand the camera sensor dynamic range without taking multiple exposures.

Besides I have never seen "ordinary people" fumble with aperture size and exposure length so that's a solved problem. Sometimes it gives "wrong" results, like exposing for the highlights rather than the shadows, that's what this technology solves.



  > there's simply no way to expand the camera sensor dynamic range without taking multiple exposures
That's the point of this paper†. They expand dynamic range by having the detectors wrap around (discarding high bits) and then recover the high bits computationally.

† here http://web.media.mit.edu/~hangzhao/modulo.html (linked by putterson in another comment)


I know, I just don't see how it solves this issue. You couldn't solve the issue before "fumbling with aperture size and exposure length"

The only thing I would consider that solves "fumble with aperture size and exposure length" would be huge ISO range (both ways) without any noise.

> No more will photographers or even ordinary people have to fumble with aperture size and exposure length.


> No mater how much you fumble with aperture and shutter speed there's simply no way to expand the camera sensor dynamic range without taking multiple exposures.

> I just don't see how it solves this issue.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_incredulity


Sure you can - you expose for the highlights and then you push the shadows in post with a crazy exponential curve. I do it all the time on digital. People used to do it via print manipulation too (filter grading, split printing, dodging and burning), except back then you exposed for the shadows and controlled the highlights (since you were capturing a negative, not a positive).

What would normally have been indistinguishable blacks are pushed into the midtones and you get a flat, grainy image. It just looks like garbage because noise gets out of hand and you lose all your color depth, but there's more dynamic range there in the sense of there being more stops of light crammed onto the final image.

There is a physical limit of the camera or the film where you cannot actually squeeze any more accuracy out of the ADC, but standard conditions are nowhere near that limit.


Some DSLRs and MILCs (and I think some semi-pro compacts too) have a wide enough dynamic range that they can work and HDR image from a single RAW file. Catch is, you have to shoot RAW and then process it with specific software. When it's done in-camera, it always is through multiple exposures. Even without specific software, you can work the effect from a single RAW file to get "multiple exposures" from it and then combine them into an HDR image.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: