Messages

I think most people who post here are well aware that an ML-based workflow greatly helps the photographer 'get the best' data for post-processing.

Like many these days, especially using a FF DLSR (I have a 5DMkIII as well as an IR-converted 50D), I find myself drawn to using ETTR, and when it is useful Dual-ISO.

One particular area where an ML-based workflow really helps is when you are using a Tilt+Shift lens as the normal in-camera Canon metering is only effective for a zero tilt and shift. As soon as you tilt and/or shift the camera's metering can not be relied upon.

Magic Lantern to the rescue. How? Well this is my typical TS-E 24mm F3.5L workflow:
- Put the camera in manual – note the TS-E has no auto-focus, obviously;
- Visualize the scene and, if require, explore/estimate the required shift range;
- Estimate the hinge height you need, ie for a tilt in degrees I use 9/2J, where J is the required hinge height in ft;
- Set the base focus, eg at slightly beyond the hyperfocal distance is not an unreasonable starting point, and as the TS-E is a prime, this number never changes for a given aperture, ie easy to remember!;
- Check the focus along the plane of sharp focus and adjust the tilt and focus accordingly, change focus rotates the plane of sharp focus around the hinge and adjusting aperture changes the focus wedge angle;
- Shift as required;
- Now the real Magic occurs. Simply invoke ML's Auto-ETTR (I use the SET method) and the exposure is adjusted to ensure your data capture is maximized, ie to the right according to your settings.

In other words, using ML, you have one less thing to worry about, ie exposure!

Bottom line: If you have a Tilt-Shift lens, then I strongly suggest you try out the ML ETTR exposure setting in your workflow.

A simple report that this plugin works perfectly: well at least in my set up, ie LR5.3 and 64bit Win7.

I just right click on the image and select cr2hdr and magically the DNG returns to Lightroom, I don't even need to synchronize the folder in library view as I need to do with some plugins.

It means that we now have 1-click processing of dual-ISO.

Many thanks to the author of the plugin.

Alex

I understand and would humbly suggest that it would be well worth doing.

I still believe, but I'm not a coder, that by first getting a 1deg spot in ML, the ability to survey the scene in LV mode, as now but a 1deg, would be great.

If ML could then return the exposure at that 1deg point in the scene and maybe give an ETTR hint, that would be good.

'All' I'm suggesting is to create an inbuilt 1deg spot meter that is independent of FL, ie lens/sensor coupled.

If this can be linked to an ETTR shift great, but honestly that is a bonus, as if I know the 1deg spot exposure reading, I can manually shift to zone 7 or 8.

Alex

At the risk of complicating this post I would like to try an idea on you, that relates to a feature request I posted the other day.

The idea is to bring an ML 1 deg spot together with AETTR.

At the moment my understanding is that the AETTR algorithm scans the entire scene and works out the shift in exposure to ensure the user's criteria is met.

I use manual (ie non ML) ETTR a lot, but with a spot meter. My work flow is simple, scan the scene with my 1 deg spot meter and select the 'hottest' part of the image that I wish to see shifted to the right, ie the highlights that I want to see in zone 7 or 8, rather than the camera's mid tone zone 5.

Through calibration I know on my 5DMkII the DR is about 7.2Ev and the highlight edge is at 3.2Ev. So I can safely shift by up to 3Ev.

I use an external meter as this is lens independent.  BTW on my 5DMkIII I would need to use about a 350mm lens to achieve a 1 deg spot - see here: http://www.spotmetering.com/1deg.htm

If ML could emulate a 1 deg spot, ie by noting the lens FL and the sensor size and returning an exposure restricted to the ML 1 deg spot, this would mean ML is a real alternative to, say, the Sekonic meter, which I use. If the lens doesn't return its FL, then ML would use a default FL that the user could change, ie to account  for a manual lens.

Once there is an ML 1 deg ML spot meter built in, the user would than be able scan the scene in LV, select the part of the scene to AETTR and let ML do the rest, ie shift the exposure or at least indicate what that shift would be.

The two killer features here are a 1 deg spot (or a selection of angles?) coupled to the user selecting the area of the scene to shift from.

ETTR with SET: do you have any custom function assigned to SET? Some of these functions will change the button code.

Alex as soon as you said this I realized the problem. SET custom function cleared and all working now. 

One thing I have noticed is that the SET option in auto-ETTR doesn't seem to work. The double press is fine.

Unless, of course, I'm missing something. I select SET, go to LV and nothing happens.

For those of us that use an external spotmeter, rather than the Canon spot metering value, we do so because of the 1deg spot size.

I wonder if it is possible to replicate a 1 deg spot meter in ML in a semi intelligent manner.

First the ML spot would try and auto detect the focal length of the lens and, knowing the sensor size, work out the pixels to use for a 1 deg spot.

If the FL is not detected ML would flag this up, use a default FL and give the user the ability to manually input the FL.

Such a spot function would really help those that wish to manually evaluate the scene.

Ideally the ML spot meter would provide exposure values, as with an external spot meter.

I have been 'playing' with the latest 5DIII version all day in 'photography' mode, ie I don't do video.

All looks good and stable.

The only thing I will say is that, for the old fellas like me, with poor eyesight, it would be nice to see the 'green bar' confirmation in magic focus a little clearer, ie broader bar or maybe a green dot in the magic window.

I fully appreciate this is minor and I will continue to test and report.

Once again: well done ML (and Alex!)

Fully aware of dual ISO etc and a user.

Just thought some may enjoy reading this article.

I'm not 'requesting' anything!

Cheers

Some may have seen this, but in case you haven't, you may interested in this article. It might stimulate the ML gurus ;-o)

http://www1.cs.columbia.edu/CAVE/publications/pdfs/Gupta_ICCV13b.pdf

The scripts I have used do NOT assume any knowledge from the camera. I'm afraid what I do is work out the number of streps from, say the macro or infinity end, by focusing on a fixed target at he required distances.

I use the EOS utility to drive the lens to the end stop, then to the focus targets. Thus I know how many steps to each focus distance, and I use a fixed aperture, ie F/8.

This is not as bad as it sounds, as if you wish to use focus stacking for landscapes, you normally use a wide angle. Thus, as I said before, at 24mm I use 3, 5 and 15 feet. BTW I use all of the http://www.georgedouvos.com apps, as I find they give me the best info.

Michael

Before someone else states the obvious, I would simply say that this has already been requested. You need to be aware of the effort that is put into ML by the developers and, as a stills shooter, I know the video 'stuff' gets the attention.

Having said that, we have dual ISO, extended bracketing and extended DR etc etc. in other words I'm not complaining.

BTW focus steps are linear for macro focus bracketing. It is only when you need to do focus bracketing for landscapes and architectural work that it becomes non-linear.

I for one have written a simple script in CHDK to do landscape focus bracketing.

For my 5DIII, I will wait for the script module to stabilize and then simply implement landscape focus bracketing there, ie on a lens and aperture specific basis.

Also, for wide angles, you really only need 2 or 3 focus brackets, and in this case I simply mark the lens with pre-calibrated focus distances, ie for my 24mm then use 3, 5, and 15 feet. 

This link maybe be of interest and worth experimenting with.

http://www.hidefcolor.com/photoshop-2/sharpening-noise-reduction-photoshop-advanced/

Cheers

Garry

Hey

This has been requested before (my me) but the idea got little traction. I found another solution using a TCL script running from Smartshooter on my Venue-8 Pro Windows Tablet.

My scenario is that I wish, for a given FL (I usually use 24mm), to carry out a focus stack, ie for landscapes.

For my 5DIII I have worked out I need to take three images at 3, 5 and 15ft, at F/10.

I initially pre-calibrated the lens with a few marks (you may wish to try this).

The Smartshooter solution hints at how ML could do this, ie in a script.

In other words, assuming you have an auto-focus lens, you get Smartshoort (or an ML script) to drive the lens first to its end stop (say the macro of the infinity end), then step to the correct focus distance, ie in my case 3, 5 and 15 ft.

I know how many steps as a pre-calibrate the lens once.

As I say, once scripts are running on my 5DIII I will give this a try, until then Smartshooter is the next best thing to ML....IMHO

Cheers

Garry

Although this nay be a little off topic, this article gives sound useful insight into getting minimum noise data in the camera: http://photographylife.com/riddle-intermediate-iso-settings.

Cheers

Garry

I have promote remote and CamRanger. Plus, I just got a Dell Venue 8 Pro. This allows me to tether to my 5DIII in the field and control the camera from the Canon EOS Utility.

Of course my dream is to control ML as well.

I will add to my own postl as my request may have confused some. The request is to allow ML to drive/step an auto focus lens from a fixed and known position, such as the infinity stop, to specified focus locations.

These locations would be pre calibrated. At the moment I do this manually via marks on my lens. That is I have premarked my lens at the focus stack locations I need for landscape. Thus is not a nacro stack request.

For those that desire full tack sharp depth of field, the only way is to carry out focus stacking. For example, even shooting at the HFD will not give full tack sharpness, really acceptable out of focusness. As an example, on my 24-105mm at 24mm, if I choose a blur spot, ie CoC + diffraction, of 20 microns, the HFD is about 14ft at around  F10. However, the defined sharpness zone is 'only' down to about 6ft.

I know some are saying that is fantastic, but if you want to cover down to a couple of feet, say, you would need to focus stack. For example, at 24mm on my 5DIII,  I would need to take three shoots at 3, 5 and 15ft.

All my calculations are made using TrueDOF-Pro, Optimum-CSP and FocusStacker.

Ok the 'request' is this. Can the developers give us a way to specify a set of focus distances, ie three in the example above? Ideally the user would be able to specify a few FLs and the related focus distances, say up to 9, so this can be easily selected from a menu.

I hope the above is clear and that it hasn't been requested before.

I appreciate this would only work for some lenses.

If enabled it would be like focus bracketing, but at specified distances.

All

I fully appreciate all that has been said, eg about night shooting. I am not suggesting the AETTR tweak as a replacement for other bracketing protocols.

I see the proposed tweak as a way to give the user an option to bracket within the AETTR.

Thinking about a bracketing strategy, I wonder if it would be better to try something like this. If the base exposure is more than, say,  X EV away from the AETTR calculated exposure, then insert as many extra brackets at, say, Y EV as required, where Y is user defined.

Thus if the user enabled the additional bracket feature, ie used a non zero value of Y, say, 1, 2, or 3, the AETTR  calculation would work out how nanny additional brackets to insert.

I believe this AETTR addition would extend the power of AETTR and cover the situation, for example, in a church, where you would meter the windows and adjust for the correct zone, then AETTR would take an image for the windows, calculate the AETTR and insert 'extra' brackets at Y Ev as required, ie to fill in. Using this strategy the AETTR only inserts additional brackets if the extreme brackets are far apart, say, greater than Y + X Ev.

In this mode the user is expecting brackets, if needed. This feature would be switched off if Y was zero.

Cheers

Garry

I'm sorry if I'm confusing you. As we know our camera sensors will max out at the extremes for a large DR.

The power of the AETTR module is that by starting with a protected highlight shot, the AETTR algorithm will give us a reasonable image at the 'other end'.

Many times the delta exposure between the highlight shot and the AETTR shot is too great, eg more than say 2EV.

By allowing the AETTR module to insert some intermediate shots, we 'fill in' between the extremes.

How the user then uses these brackets is a post processing choice.

Cheers

Garry

We mustn't get confused by using HDR terms.

What I am proposing is using the AETTR module to create a bracket set to cover the DR of the scene.

If you then wish to use this bracket set by throwing it at an HDR programme that is up to you. You can also use the brackets with a Enfusion engine or manually blend in photoshop.

Currently we have three great ML ways to guarantee we take a set of brackets that cover a scene's  required dynamic range capture, ie the important highlights and the important shadows.

First we can meter and calculate the required bracket set then uses ML bracketing.

Second , we can use auto bracketing in ML, but 'loose' control of the number of brackets.

Thirdly, we can use AETTR, meter for the highlights and adjust from the 18%, zone V to, say, zone VII, use this as the base exposure and invoke AETTR to capture the calculated ETTR one. You thus end up with two brackets, a user selected highlight and an ETTR. But these two brackets may be too far apart for post processing.

What I am proposing is an ETTR enhancement is to give the AETTR menu one more variable, namely the number of images to evenly take between the base exposure and the ETTR one. At the moment this is zero. In other words no intermediate brackets.

The new user variable, between 0 and 9, say, will insert that number of brackets, evenly spaced between the base and the calculated AETTR.

This enhancement of AETTR will bridge the benefits of advanced bracketing and AETTR.

Finally, I'm not a programmer but would like to know how to take a module and tweak it, ie turn of to text, tweak it and recompile it. 

Cheers

Garry

Let me say up front that what follows is my personal workflow. I'm sharing it with fellow MLers in the spirit of learning and improving. My workflow is based on the latest nightly build for my 50D (I am waiting for the release for the 5DIII that works with the latest Canon firmware as I need the F8 focusing). I assume the reader is familiar with ML, Advanced Bracketing, Auto-ETTR and Dual-ISO.

So here is the workflow:
a.   Enable the appropriate modules, eg Auto-ETTR and Dual-ISO;

b.   Compose and focus the scene and assess the DR of the scene, either using 'guess work', in-camera metering (ML or Canon) or use an external meter ( I use an Sekonic L-750DR);

c.   Based on the metering decide on one of the following basic capture strategies:
i.   If the DR allows it, ie low and containable in a single image capture, use a single exposure and set metering handraulically using your photographic skills (in whatever mode you decide to use, ie Tv, Av or M). This is the non-ML-enhanced base approach;
ii.   As above, but get some help by using (double-half press or SET, ie not 'Always-On' or Auto-Snap) Auto-ETTR (to obtain a single image capture) and ensure maximize the quality/quantity of the image file, ie maximize the number of useful photons captured and converted, without blowing out highlights. A further refinement here is to switch on dual-ISO as well, but I prefer not to use this as part of my photographic workflow;
iii.   Use Auto-Snap or Always-On AETTR and first meter for the highlights you wish to 'protect' (recompose as required) and use this as the starting image for the AETTR capture. Using this approach you will get at least two images, one with good highlight capture and the other with, likely blown out highlights, but with good shadow/mid exposure (according to you're a-ETTR setting), ie based on the AETTR algorithmics. This is a good strategy for capturing a two-image bracket set, ie as long as the scene's DR is not too large for your camera. This two-image bracketing is fast and virtually guarantees you will never have blown out highlights that are important to you);
iv.   Switch off AETTR (and dual-ISO) and switch on advanced bracketing and select the number of brackets to cover your metering or use the auto setting, which although will mean more image captures will result in a full DR bracket set.

d.   Ingest into Lightroom (I have the Adobe Photographers set-up, ie Photoshop-CC + LR);

e.   For the single image captures I will then carry out basic LR processing as normal;

f.   For the two-bracket (auto-snap) capture I will adjust the images, eg to ensure good highlights in one and good shadows/mid-tones in the other. I will throw these two images down two post-processing paths. First I will use LR/Enfuse, and then I will use 'Merge to 32-bit HDR'. I then have two image files to 'play around' with, a 16-bit one and 32-bit one;

g.   For the advanced bracketing set I will once again try several post-processing routes, eg Photomatx, HDR Efex Pro 2 or Merge to 32-bit HDR'.

h.   In all cases I will usually go into Ps-CC and finish off the image with a variety of post-processing tools.

So, in conclusion, I'm not saying the above is the THE way to go, but, for me, it works and I thank the ML team for that!

Cheers

Garry

I have CamRanger running on my 5dIII.

If only it could interface to ML.

There is a lot of physics going on here. I commend these two articles to those who wish to have a greater understanding of their sensors:

http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/iso/

And for the 5DIII owners

http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/evaluation-canon-5diii/

Cheers