OM1 raw files

[blackfox]

in response to the other thread re iso etc ,here's a sample of how much you can push dynamic range with the OM1 I suspect the MKii will be even better . at this particular site the birds can one minute be in bright skies then at ground level in the open or as in this case flying in front of dark pine trees there are no camera settings that can cope with such rapid changes and you basically have to take what's given and see what you can do with it .... this one is a vastly underexposed RAW file that once processed produced a half decent image later on today I will do the same process on a overexposed RAW file ..
these days I have total confidence in my gear to the point that I just shoot knowing that whatever I'm going to get useable shots .. the only hard part these days is nailing focus
first shot underexposed raw .. followed by cropped and processed j.peg from it

[blackfox]

and here you go a overexposed raw file and the processed shot from it .. throw away the rule book it doesn't apply anymore .. all shots P/P in LR/PS and topaz de-noise 3 year old version

[Ian]

Yes, indeed - this matches my own experience. The sensor, fundamentally, only has one sensitivity, but the processing of the data from the sensor is what gives you what our eyes see as the correct exposure.

ian

[blackfox]

we definitely couldn't do this a few short years ago , canon was a no no , Sony made t.v's and walkmans, and Nikon sold cameras on its alleged dynamic range

[BDennis]

I haven’t seen a Sony Walkman in use for some time! It seems like iPod is the new Walkman in terms of obsolescence. I went into Curry’s yesterday looking for wired headphones for an old iPod. The young lady gave me a blank look when asked, everything is Bluetooth now and what I asked for is an alien concept!

[rustyarrow]

Jeff what software are you using on these please?

[blackfox]

I only use LR for initial upload ed . and just let it do its thing with auto .. I then crop to size in LR and adjust sliders by hand as needed , when happy with how it looks I export it to P/S where I apply topaz de-noise ( 3 year old stand alone version ) normally just allowing the standard de-noising ( no artefacts) then re-size for web at circa 2048 pixels on long edge .. then finally apply smart sharpen if needed .. last step is to upload to desktop as a jpg file . whole process takes around 3 minutes start to finish.
my only deletions these days are wildly oof shots ,yes it does happen or duplications I get far far more keepers per session than any previous camera .
on camera I only use two settings C1 is set for static birds and C2 for b.i.f its a simple turn of the dial for either

[rustyarrow]

I use Affinity Photo, does all I need with DXO 3 for noise, Affinity not so good at fishing out the details in the shadows, if you push it just looks "muddy" , I just shoot manual and have one C mode for bring in and out Pro Capture with a button push , I get by.

[wanderer]

That sounds very like the process I use.
I'm also delighted to see and hear of quite a bit of cropping.

[BDennis]

It works well adjusting exposures in post process as you’ve shown. I’m careful with overexposure as I’ve been caught out with birds that are mostly brown but have a white breast or something like a GC grebe - bumped up to +0.7 EV on a dark looking bird against dark background then found highlights blown. It seems worse to lose details in the blown highlights on an overexposed shot than have nothing in the shadows going the other way? What I underexpose regularly on is Barn Owls if I can find them, they always come out brighter than I expect with no exposure adjustments!

Like Ed I sometimes find the shadow detail a bit “muddy” on the OM-1 for underexposed shots even running through DxO. I suppose exposure bracket might be the answer but that would be another half million bird photos to deal with each year 😂

[rustyarrow]

I tend to shoot everything underexposed by 1/3 stop, always think my view finder is to bright- same on every OM cam I have had- it is just me I am sure.

[Phill D]

No Ed, I do that as well 😊. Comes from starting with an E510 that blew highlights very easily.

[MJ224]

I always thought that a slight over exposure is best. All the detail is there, and the photo can be downed in PP.

But if the exposure is only a stop or two out, it can be still usable after processing...

[blackfox]

That may well apply as a guide line mark ,but I have tried to demonstrate with the above posts that the rule book is in need of rewriting a few years ago both those shots would have gone straight in the bin

[MJ224]

Yes Jeff. You have salvaged what might have been considered right-offs. As I have done when exposures have not been right. High ISO's work well too, but when I was at the Osprey Centre this week, I deliberately dialled down ISO to 400 or so, and was rewarded with better IQ. So the old values are still relevant...........

[nc_killie]

Bugger, I need to upskill my PP and go through several thousand photos, thanks Jeff🤔

[blackfox]

Your welcome 🤷🏽♂️🤷🏽♂️😝😝🫣