I'm amazed by the quality difference between 14 and 10 bit
But explainable, downloaded the original dng's and checked them.
In the 14bit file you can see the wall(or shadows) are exposed at the left border/lower limit of the histogram, BUT within limits off the histogram, no cutoff in histogram.
When you do an exposure correction of 3 stops on the 14 bit file, the left side of the histogram starts low and raises, no cut off in detail.
Bottom line, you nailed the exposure for lifting the shadows.
The 10 bit file has the same exposure, but the lower 4 bits of data are cut off.
If you raise it with an exposure of 3 stops, you can see the histogram starts high, so the data in the shadows is cut off.
You nailed the exposure time for 14 bit, but for 10 bit this means detail loss in the shadows.
Makes all sense, but didn't think about it too much before, the quality difference is a lot.
I'm using the raw histogram data to expose correctly, but does the raw histogram take in account if you're recording 14/12 or 10 bit ?
Cause it seems if you're planning on lifting the shadows, and if your shadows are at the all left end of the histogram, you're better of with 14 bit.