Moving HDR images..?

Karel Bata · January 16th, 2009, 05:34 AM

12fps eh? So I'm only out by a wee factor of six..? :) But the main point is that stills cameras already do auto-bracketing, so it's not a completely wild idea.

But you like the 3 CCD prism? The software ND sounds like it could work.

I wonder if it's possible to replace the chips on an old prism camera with your own? Or is that just too difficult? If it's possible (big big if) do you really need full HD res on all 3 chips? So what about this: the -1 could be a more sensitive B+W chip to pick out shadow detail, and the +1 a cheaper but less sensitive chip for getting the highlights? Genlocked together, running to 3 hard drives. Shoot me down in flames!

HDR videography will certainly be a reality in ten years, but it would be so nice to do it sooner.[/list]

Biel Bestue · January 17th, 2009, 04:48 AM

3ccd with the dichroic filters on the prism replaced with ND's with diferent levels? but would a 3 exposure be useful as a "bracketed" image?

Take Vos · January 17th, 2009, 05:58 AM

There is a bayer-like sensor, which also includes white pixels. As there is no color filtering in the white pixels they are a lot more sensitive and are thus able to get a few more bits of intensity depth. Kodak RGBW filter.

I have also seen a sensor which included two photo sites for each pixel, a large and a small one. I don't know where I've seen those though.

Cheers,
Take

Andy Tejral · January 17th, 2009, 10:15 AM

As I've read this thread, one question comes to mind: once you've got this HDR video, where are you going to view it?

Despite all the talk of huge contrast ratios on flat screen TVs, I believe all the electronics are based on the old NTSC 100 IRE standard.

Just like still images, yes, you can create images that have a large dynamic range--in fact, so large that no printer or screen can actually display the image.

Karel Bata · January 17th, 2009, 11:27 AM

You would use Photomatix to 'blend' the image sequences together to bring the highlights and shadows to within normal viewing parameters. Well, not blend but tonemap (would still appreciate an explanation of how exactly that works without flattening the image!). It means - and taking that photomatix page as an example - combining the three pictures on the left of the Eiffel Tower to make the big one.

Currently Photomatix can only do this in batch mode by treating each triplet of frames as a single image. HDSoft (or someone) needs to make a plug-in to make it work with moving images.

Biel Bestue · January 17th, 2009, 06:50 PM

Kate: Super CCD - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Biel Bestue · February 15th, 2009, 07:23 PM

wow this dynamax seems to rock, and it's form 2008 i guess by end of 2009 or 1010 we'll see another genesis form panavision using this

but for us, this chip may be really expensive coming form panavision

Toenis Liivamaegi · February 16th, 2009, 12:00 PM

But as far as Red RAW goes I'm sure it can be converted to HDR. If it can be done from single exposure RAW photographs why not from Red RAW? Even with still image tools you can extract three different exps from Red RAW and off you go. RED One rentals are cheap these days.

T

Karel Bata · February 17th, 2009, 04:56 AM

Nice idea, but how far does the latitude of Red extend above white and below black? Film stock will go 2+ stops while a top end digital stills will also have some of that extra latitude built in. I doubt that Red (which is really 2 to 3.2k, depending on who you are) will record any image information that is 'invisible' on set when any such lost bit depth could instead be used to beef up what you can actually see.

Nicky Campos · February 17th, 2009, 03:13 PM

I believe this can be done but remember Red is only raw in terms of "raw bayer sensor data", its actually VERY compressed (what a marketing genius) - so artifacts will be many like I said earlier :(

However the new ikonoskop camera is TRUE RAW 12-BIT (not compressed at all) which I believe could be the first acceptable tone-mapping tool provided you get all ya exposures in a single capture... shoot in the shade I guess :)

Karel Bata · February 18th, 2009, 04:50 AM

I think that someone here is getting this wrong. Is it you guys or me? or are there different flavors of HDR I don't know about?

My understanding is that a normally exposed image of a subject with excessive brightness range will look like this http://www.hdrsoft.com/images/eiffel/mean530.jpg with a burnt out sky and detail lost to shadow, while the bracketed exposures will capture those details: http://www.hdrsoft.com/images/eiffel/over530.jpg and http://www.hdrsoft.com/images/eiffel/under530.jpg No one exposure gets it all. You're saying that a Red or Ikonoscope will? I don't think so. Neither of them will be able to handle the range in a picture like this The Lonely Road to the Dinosaur Dig which was shot pointed at the sun! Maybe that particular one's a long way off, but what i'd love to be able to do is get images looking this This is Nathaniel.

Or is that last one possible from a RAW image? Would be good, but I doubt it. I'm pretty certain you can't do this http://www.hdrsoft.com/images/eiffel/tm530.jpg

Nicky Campos · February 18th, 2009, 02:53 PM

Yes alot of pro photographers use a single-exposed raw 16-bit (although usually 12-bit wrapped into 16-bits) photo to tone-map and achieve a "hdr/tone-mapped effect".

Sometimes if there are extreme lighting conditions one should bracket exposures to capture wider dynamic ranges.

Remember that a true HDR image is unable to be displayed on a 8-bit(low DR) monitor, that is why tone-mapping is usually applied so that all the captured DR can be displayed within a 8-bit range.

Dylan Couper · February 18th, 2009, 09:58 PM

I've done live action (non-timelapse) HDR-esque video. I used my Canon 1D mk2 shooting RAW frames at 8fps, then made multiple exposures of each still using different ISOs, and blended them in Photomatix, brought them into Vegas, and boom... video.

And... loads of range, but the surreal look was too much and looked cheesy so I didn't pursue it any further.

Nicky Campos · February 19th, 2009, 01:27 AM

Nice Dylan! I know the cheesy look is off-putting but thats just one possible look, try doing something more natural and wide DR looking.

Craig Bellaire · February 19th, 2009, 02:35 PM

How about using HD usb web cams and capture all at once?

January 17th, 2009, 05:58 AM	#18
Take Vos Major Player Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Amsterdam The Netherlands Posts: 200	There is a bayer-like sensor, which also includes white pixels. As there is no color filtering in the white pixels they are a lot more sensitive and are thus able to get a few more bits of intensity depth. Kodak RGBW filter. I have also seen a sensor which included two photo sites for each pixel, a large and a small one. I don't know where I've seen those though. Cheers, Take __________________ VOSGAMES, http://www.vosgames.nl/ developer of Boom Recorder and Mirage Recorder

January 17th, 2009, 10:15 AM	#19
Andy Tejral Major Player Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: New York City Posts: 523	As I've read this thread, one question comes to mind: once you've got this HDR video, where are you going to view it? Despite all the talk of huge contrast ratios on flat screen TVs, I believe all the electronics are based on the old NTSC 100 IRE standard. Just like still images, yes, you can create images that have a large dynamic range--in fact, so large that no printer or screen can actually display the image. __________________ Andy Tejral Railroad Videographer

February 18th, 2009, 09:58 PM	#28
Dylan Couper Wrangler Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Vancouver, British Columbia Posts: 8,314	I've done live action (non-timelapse) HDR-esque video. I used my Canon 1D mk2 shooting RAW frames at 8fps, then made multiple exposures of each still using different ISOs, and blended them in Photomatix, brought them into Vegas, and boom... video. And... loads of range, but the surreal look was too much and looked cheesy so I didn't pursue it any further. __________________ Need to rent camera gear in Vancouver BC? Check me out at camerarentalsvancouver.com

February 19th, 2009, 02:35 PM	#30
Craig Bellaire Major Player Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Rochester, NY Posts: 422	USB Web Cams How about using HD usb web cams and capture all at once? __________________ Craig Bellaire www.VerticalVideoSolutions.com

January 16th, 2009, 05:34 AM	#16
Karel Bata Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: London, Antarctica Posts: 199	12fps eh? So I'm only out by a wee factor of six..? :) But the main point is that stills cameras already do auto-bracketing, so it's not a completely wild idea. But you like the 3 CCD prism? The software ND sounds like it could work. I wonder if it's possible to replace the chips on an old prism camera with your own? Or is that just too difficult? If it's possible (big big if) do you really need full HD res on all 3 chips? So what about this: the -1 could be a more sensitive B+W chip to pick out shadow detail, and the +1 a cheaper but less sensitive chip for getting the highlights? Genlocked together, running to 3 hard drives. Shoot me down in flames! HDR videography will certainly be a reality in ten years, but it would be so nice to do it sooner.[/list]

January 17th, 2009, 04:48 AM	#17
Biel Bestue Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 96	3ccd with the dichroic filters on the prism replaced with ND's with diferent levels? but would a 3 exposure be useful as a "bracketed" image?

January 17th, 2009, 11:27 AM	#20
Karel Bata Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: London, Antarctica Posts: 199	You would use Photomatix to 'blend' the image sequences together to bring the highlights and shadows to within normal viewing parameters. Well, not blend but tonemap (would still appreciate an explanation of how exactly that works without flattening the image!). It means - and taking that photomatix page as an example - combining the three pictures on the left of the Eiffel Tower to make the big one. Currently Photomatix can only do this in batch mode by treating each triplet of frames as a single image. HDSoft (or someone) needs to make a plug-in to make it work with moving images.

January 17th, 2009, 06:50 PM	#21
Biel Bestue Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 96	Kate: Super CCD - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

February 15th, 2009, 07:23 PM	#22
Biel Bestue Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 96	wow this dynamax seems to rock, and it's form 2008 i guess by end of 2009 or 1010 we'll see another genesis form panavision using this but for us, this chip may be really expensive coming form panavision

February 16th, 2009, 12:00 PM	#23
Toenis Liivamaegi Major Player Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Tartu, Estonia Posts: 579	But as far as Red RAW goes I'm sure it can be converted to HDR. If it can be done from single exposure RAW photographs why not from Red RAW? Even with still image tools you can extract three different exps from Red RAW and off you go. RED One rentals are cheap these days. T

February 17th, 2009, 04:56 AM	#24
Karel Bata Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: London, Antarctica Posts: 199	Nice idea, but how far does the latitude of Red extend above white and below black? Film stock will go 2+ stops while a top end digital stills will also have some of that extra latitude built in. I doubt that Red (which is really 2 to 3.2k, depending on who you are) will record any image information that is 'invisible' on set when any such lost bit depth could instead be used to beef up what you can actually see.

February 17th, 2009, 03:13 PM	#25
Nicky Campos Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Johannesburg, South Africa Posts: 35	I believe this can be done but remember Red is only raw in terms of "raw bayer sensor data", its actually VERY compressed (what a marketing genius) - so artifacts will be many like I said earlier :( However the new ikonoskop camera is TRUE RAW 12-BIT (not compressed at all) which I believe could be the first acceptable tone-mapping tool provided you get all ya exposures in a single capture... shoot in the shade I guess :)

February 18th, 2009, 04:50 AM	#26
Karel Bata Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: London, Antarctica Posts: 199	I think that someone here is getting this wrong. Is it you guys or me? or are there different flavors of HDR I don't know about? My understanding is that a normally exposed image of a subject with excessive brightness range will look like this http://www.hdrsoft.com/images/eiffel/mean530.jpg with a burnt out sky and detail lost to shadow, while the bracketed exposures will capture those details: http://www.hdrsoft.com/images/eiffel/over530.jpg and http://www.hdrsoft.com/images/eiffel/under530.jpg No one exposure gets it all. You're saying that a Red or Ikonoscope will? I don't think so. Neither of them will be able to handle the range in a picture like this The Lonely Road to the Dinosaur Dig which was shot pointed at the sun! Maybe that particular one's a long way off, but what i'd love to be able to do is get images looking this This is Nathaniel. Or is that last one possible from a RAW image? Would be good, but I doubt it. I'm pretty certain you can't do this http://www.hdrsoft.com/images/eiffel/tm530.jpg

February 18th, 2009, 02:53 PM	#27
Nicky Campos Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Johannesburg, South Africa Posts: 35	Yes alot of pro photographers use a single-exposed raw 16-bit (although usually 12-bit wrapped into 16-bits) photo to tone-map and achieve a "hdr/tone-mapped effect". Sometimes if there are extreme lighting conditions one should bracket exposures to capture wider dynamic ranges. Remember that a true HDR image is unable to be displayed on a 8-bit(low DR) monitor, that is why tone-mapping is usually applied so that all the captured DR can be displayed within a 8-bit range.

February 19th, 2009, 01:27 AM	#29
Nicky Campos Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Johannesburg, South Africa Posts: 35	Nice Dylan! I know the cheesy look is off-putting but thats just one possible look, try doing something more natural and wide DR looking.