I hope he isn’t a photo enthousiast and uses DxOPL as his developer software…
But your right, rich busines owners and ceo’s always thinks there right and because no one dare to give some inside in the truth so they keep deluted.
It’s why they foated upwards, big air heads…(ego’s).
What would be nice if camera is showing the exposure correction by Active D lighting idyn ans such, in the exposure value correction which you can manual set or override.
Me i have it active and find the 3 -1/3 steps handy as aid wile shooting freely wile walking. I just use evc to push it up again if i want.
A summary of references I found on this subject is that the only thing that gets affected for a RAW file is that overall exposure gets lowered.
The main purpose of Active D-Lighting is for the production of high dynamic range JPEGs in an attempt to emulate the range available in RAW files.
Thus, if you are only shooting RAW, there is absolutely no point at all in using Active D-Lighting.
So, yes, @George you are spot on in your statement.
@CaptureNX2 are you saying that your customer is explicitly asking for you to take shots in JPEG? If so, I can only guess that he knows absolutely zero about photography and has latched on to the Nikon published blurb which fails to mention that it only really makes any difference to JPEG files. In which case, in order to comply with his demand to use active D-Lighting, you need to shoot in JPEG mode only and ignore all the other PhotoLab benefits that come from shooting RAW like DeepPRIME noise reduction and astounding shadow detail recovery that goes well beyond the limits of Nikons claimed benefits of shooting Active D-Lighting JPEGs.
I will re-pose my question - if you are shooting RAW and only sending him JPEG exports, how is he going to know that you have used Active D-Lighting or the more powerful option of PhotoLab’s high dynamic range handling?
A NEF with ADL active will be partially different than a non-ADL NEF.
The non-ADL NEF - even with exposure compensation - will not be “the same” as a NEF with Active D-Lighting,
The “benefits” of ADL on the NEF side are minimal, and as you write @Joanna the main benefits are for the in-camera produced JPEGs.
Why not leave ADL on (so the person who told him about ADL, even if uninformed, will be pleased) and edit your images as you normally do? Everyone is happy, customer will not have a reason to complain, and you get paid. Everyone is smiling.
As I recall, using ADL was a requirement for you to get the job, so to do otherwise would not be ethical. Probably your customer doesn’t know anything about ADL, but a friend of his does. Either way, you’re happy when you get the $$, and the customer is happy because you did what he wanted you to do, and hopefully your beautiful photos speak for themselves.
What do you mean with “partial”? Both are based on the same camera and sensor. The only thing that might be different is the exposure. The second part of ADL belongs to the conversion, not to the RAW file.
If the exposure is different then the RAW file is different.
I think I would agree with that and, since he is not that well informed, turn it in to the lowest setting and just take the minimal exposure reduction that will give you in the RAW file - that’s easy to recover in PL. Then you can truthfully say that you used it and he will never realise that it made sweet diddly squat difference to the in camera RAW file and you get the satisfaction of knowing you did all the real work in PL
Of course, what you could do, for your own amusement, is to take a RAW+JPEG shot with ADL active and then see what it takes in PL to match it. (the clue is in Required’s post)…
That is probably not the case. I think it’s clear that his employer knows little about photography and the purpose of ADL. However, this gentleman may be familiar with Nikon’s Capture NX-D or the newer NX Studio software where in-camera settings like ADL are displayed with raw files by default.
None of this matters. If ADL is left on, you’ve met his request. Then edit in RAW just as you would normally do. You make a great print, and you can honestly say you did what he asked for. You and all of us know that it won’t make any difference, once you edit in PL5, but you >>HAVE<< shot the image with ADL turned on, and you will NOT be deceiving him, or whoever told him about ADL. You wrote earlier that shooting in ADL was requirement, not an option. …just my opinion, keep everyone happy.
