Go Back   IceInSpace > Equipment > Astrophotography and Imaging Equipment and Discussions

Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 10-09-2010, 01:56 PM
Octane's Avatar
Octane (Humayun)
IIS Member #671

Octane is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 11,158
Canon EOS 5D Mark II's used to create HDR video -- world first

As much as I personally loathe HDR, I can see this making its way onto film for very, very neat cinematic visual effects.


Reminds me of some of the gritty scenes in movies like 300, or, the pixel shader-like effects used in A Scanner Darkly.

Reply With Quote
Old 14-09-2010, 08:09 PM
shelltree's Avatar
shelltree (Shelley)

shelltree is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 842
Wow, that's certainly different! I can see how it could have its benefits, if done well.

Edit: unrelated to HDR but I LOVE this video taken with the 5Dmkii http://lightscript.wordpress.com/200...alid-mohtaseb/
Reply With Quote
Old 14-09-2010, 08:16 PM
Bassnut's Avatar
Bassnut (Fred)
Narrowfield rules!

Bassnut is offline
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 4,772
Originally Posted by Octane View Post
As much as I personally loathe HDRH
Thats interesting, whys that?.
Reply With Quote
Old 14-09-2010, 08:26 PM
Omaroo's Avatar
Omaroo (Chris Malikoff)
Let there be night...

Omaroo is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sydney/Cooma
Posts: 7,628
I like it! The quality looks somewhat surreal. Very nice!
Reply With Quote
Old 14-09-2010, 08:49 PM
Octane's Avatar
Octane (Humayun)
IIS Member #671

Octane is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 11,158

Because it's the single greatest way of destroying data that you've captured by spending thousands of dollars on hardware.

I am able to create high-dynamic range images without the need to resort to bs software which reverse engineers the Canon specification to approximate what it thinks the sensor captured. No, thanks. I've spent far too much money on hardware and good glass to let software ruin the hard work I put into capturing my images.

Reply With Quote
Old 15-09-2010, 03:19 AM
troypiggo's Avatar
troypiggo (Troy)
Bust Duster

troypiggo is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 4,837
Looks quite clever. Must take a massive amount of processing?

Have you ever noticed that movies and TV cameras always seem to capture a much higher dynamic range than our dSLRs? Next time you're watching TV or a movie, think about what's in the scene and how the lighting is. I'm not talking about studio shots where the lighting is all controlled, more like outdoor scenes in full sunlight.

I've often wondered whether it's the cameras they use do have a greater dynamic range. Some shots they may use filters for the sky for example, others I know they'll use screens/reflectors to soften harsh sunlight on actors or whatever. But take a midday sun shot of a city, sky and highlights are not blown, yet shadows between buildings can still make out detail.
Reply With Quote
Old 15-09-2010, 05:28 AM
bojan's Avatar

bojan is offline
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mt Waverley, VIC
Posts: 6,054
Amazing technology, but results are pure kitsch.
Reply With Quote
Old 15-09-2010, 07:34 AM
avandonk's Avatar

avandonk is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 4,786
Why HDR looks 'wrong' is because a very wide dynamic 20 bits+ range is tone mapped down to 8 bit so our pathetic displays can cope. Even straight 14 bit dynamic range as produced by the 5D MII cannot be displayed realistically on an 8 bit LCD display. A 16 bit astro camera is even more let down.

There are now wide gamut monitors available with 10 bits per colour channel.

To take full advantage of this monitor you will need a high end graphics card such as the Quadro capable of more than 8 bit colour generally used in publishing and movie industry. If you use an ordinary graphics card the colours will look washed out.

or one with a 12 bit look up table here


This will show a wide gamut with a high end 'normal' graphics card.
I am sorely tempted to get this monitor when I arrange to sell one of my organs.

It is not HDR that is the problem it is our displays that have a pathetic dynamic range compared with reality viewed by the human eye.

It just looks 'wrong' when a very dim nebula and a very bright star are in the same region on an 8 bit display tone mapped from high dynamic range down to 8 bits. The situation can be even worse as the cheaper displays are only really 6 bit.

As for prints you are in even more trouble as the dynamic range is even lower.

I have yet to try it but a high quality transparency very evenly backlit would be better than a print.

Here is a stunning video done with Canon.


It works because the lighting is under a dull sky so the dynamic range is not to high.


Last edited by avandonk; 15-09-2010 at 07:51 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old 15-09-2010, 07:38 PM
leon's Avatar
Registered User

leon is offline
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: ballarat
Posts: 10,888
H, all I can say is NICE.

Reply With Quote


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT +10. The time is now 10:17 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Star Adventurer
Celestron RASA
Lunatico Astronomical
Astronomy and Electronics Centre