Mavic 2 Pro Photography – HDR

[calmar81]

Dear fellow pilots,

I have experimented with aerial photography in recent months and have some experience with the Mavic Air in bracketing. In Lightroom Classic CC I merge the shots (usually 5) then into an HDR.

If I understood the HDR topic correctly, the picture will receive more tonal range... more data in general and I am almost overwhelmed by the results.

Now I also take pictures with the Mavic 2 Pro, which of course makes things even better ... "pro", as the name suggests.

Now to my question: How much difference is there between a HDR photo from the Mavic Air (which consists of 3-5 photos in the 8-bit area) and a normal 10-bit photo of the Mavic 2 Pro. Is the photo of the Pro, because it contains a higher amount of image data, not synonymous already a kind of "HDR"? I know, that there are no under- and overexposed photos, that are normally merged into an HDR-shot, but in 10-bit, the sensor should recognise more light and dark?

I ask, because the Mavic 2 Pro, for example, does not allow rotation of the gimbal for portrait photos and I've photographed my vertical panoramas so far only with 3 normal RAW files. I was very satisfied with the results of the normal RAW, even though it was not taken from a series of 3-5 bracketed shots.

Thanks for tips and hints that help me and maybe others to better understand the topic.

 

[Cymruflyer]

You incorrectly stated... " I know, that there are no under- and overexposed photos, that are normally merged into an HDR-shot". In fact that is exactly how you merge photos in an HDR image. You take a range of images from over exposed to underexposed of a scene, then merge all the parts that are correctly exposed in the photos of each different frame in order to blend all the different sections to gain something closer to what the eye sees, because your eye has a dynamic range that can only be dreamed about in a camera sensor.

Therefore when you have such a range of contrast in a scene, you must expose sections of that scene to get them correct and no one image will have all those ranges of contrast correctly exposed. That is why it is always better to use more as in five plus, than less, as in just three images, if you want to get the best overall HDR finished image of a scene, that best represents what you can see with your eye.

 

[Johnmcl7]

The short answer is yes (assuming I've understood your question correctly), the larger Mavic Pro 2 sensor has a wider dynamic range and therefore can capture more detail in the bright and dark areas of a photo. Taking a set of bracketed shots and stacking them together also gives you a wider range in the final image.

Below is a Mavic 2 Pro comparison shot with the original image on the left and the edited one on the right:

There is an impressive amount of detail you can pull in the under and overexposed areas.

Generally the larger the sensor the better the image quality in terms of dynamic range, detail and noise, I haven't used the Mavic Air but with the original Mavic Pro I found there was very little latitude to recover detail in under and overexposed areas. Taking bracketed shots can help overcome the limitations of the smaller sensor as you effectively capture more information and combine it back together into a single shot. The results from such a process can considerably improve what is possible from a single shot but the effectiveness can vary depending on the scene, the Mavic's gimbal does a great job stabilising the multiple shots however if there's a lot movement in the scene then the result can be soft in those areas.

 

[calmar81]

You incorrectly stated... " I know, that there are no under- and overexposed photos, that are normally merged into an HDR-shot". In fact that is exactly how you merge photos in an HDR image...

No, I meant in a normal 10-bit photo of the Mavic 2 Pro, there isn‘t

 

[sar104]

RAW images from the Mavic 2 Pro are 16 bit, not 10 bit (that's video), but it's the dynamic range that is the limiting factor, not the bit depth. The Sony sensor has a dynamic range of about 12 EV at ISO 100. The JPEG mapping to 8 bits will potentially miss detail in the highlights and shadows, so you can independently tone map a RAW image to pull those out. Every stop change in an HDR RAW sequence adds 1 EV to the dynamic range over and above the sensor's 12 EV.

 

[calmar81]

RAW images from the Mavic 2 Pro are 16 bit, not 10 bit (that's video), but it's the dynamic range that is the limiting factor, not the bit depth. The Sony sensor has a dynamic range of about 12 EV at ISO 100. The JPEG mapping to 8 bits will potentially miss detail in the highlights and shadows, so you can independently tone map a RAW image to pull those out. Every stop change in an HDR RAW sequence adds 1 EV to the dynamic range over and above the sensor's 12 EV.

Thanks a lot for your insight look into the tech specs! Do you know about the Bit-depth of the Mavic Air in photo mode? Lightroom shows 8-bit. Is that correct? That would explain the huge difference in picture quality or tone details, I noticed.

 

[sar104]

Thanks a lot for your insight look into the tech specs! Do you know about the Bit-depth of the Mavic Air in photo mode? Lightroom shows 8-bit. Is that correct? That would explain the huge difference in picture quality or tone details, I noticed.

You must be looking at JPEG images, which are always 8 bit. RAW is going to be 16 bit but, as I mentioned, that's not what defines dynamic range - you just need enough bits to record the sensor resolution of its dynamic range.

 

[CanadaDrone]

The 1" Sony sensor has way more DR than the 1/2.3" sensor in the Mavic Air.

HDRs are fairly simple - they are used to capture a larger dynamic range than can be done with a single exposure (since a camera can only expose for one thing at a time), or to avoid having to push a single photo too far in post processing.

The more DR you have, the fewer photos you need to make a similar HDR. With the Mavic 2 Pro, you can probably get away with -2EV, 0EV, +2EV for most HDRs as a rough starting point. You would want to take more photos with smaller EV steps to get a similar result out of the Air, but the 1" sensor in the M2P really is a lot better.

This is roughly the dynamic range difference between a Mavic 2 Pro and a Mavic Air:

Photographic Dynamic Range versus ISO Setting

Best results will always be to shoot in RAW and process the HDR in proper software. The auto HDRs the drone spits out are pretty bad.

 

[calmar81]

The 1" Sony sensor has way more DR than the 1/2.3" sensor in the Mavic Air.

HDRs are fairly simple - they are used to capture a larger dynamic range than can be done with a single exposure (since a camera can only expose for one thing at a time), or to avoid having to push a single photo too far in post processing.

The more DR you have, the fewer photos you need to make a similar HDR. With the Mavic 2 Pro, you can probably get away with -2EV, 0EV, +2EV for most HDRs as a rough starting point. You would want to take more photos with smaller EV steps to get a similar result out of the Air, but the 1" sensor in the M2P really is a lot better.

This is roughly the dynamic range difference between a Mavic 2 Pro and a Mavic Air:

Photographic Dynamic Range versus ISO Setting

Best results will always be to shoot in RAW and process the HDR in proper software. The auto HDRs the drone spits out are pretty bad.

Aaaah, that's it what I wanted to hear. Thank you very much!

Could one assume, that a Mavic 2 Pro shoots normal RAW photo-footage the same or better quality than a Mavic Air bracketed HDR shot via Lightroom / external Software?

 

[sar104]

Aaaah, that's it what I wanted to hear. Thank you very much!

Could one assume, that a Mavic 2 Pro shoots normal RAW photo-footage the same or better quality than a Mavic Air bracketed HDR shot via Lightroom / external Software?

That question potentially convolves different measures of quality. If you are specifically talking about dynamic range, rather than resolution, color, noise etc., then it depends on how may photos on the MA makes up the HDR stack, because with an arbitrary number of bracketed images you can make the dynamic range as large as you want, while the M2 dynamic range is fixed.

 

[CanadaDrone]

Aaaah, that's it what I wanted to hear. Thank you very much!

Could one assume, that a Mavic 2 Pro shoots normal RAW photo-footage the same or better quality than a Mavic Air bracketed HDR shot via Lightroom / external Software?

The Mavic Air still image quality is bad enough (I have one) that as long as you weren't pushing the file too much in post processing, I would much rather have the M2P file in most scenarios.

The Air is great for video, but stills don't hold a candle to the M2P. The Air uses a tiny 1/2.3" sensor (same as your cell phone or a cheap point & shoot camera) and is very limited by physics.

 

[thegronz]

Dear fellow pilots,

I have experimented with aerial photography in recent months and have some experience with the Mavic Air in bracketing. In Lightroom Classic CC I merge the shots (usually 5) then into an HDR.

If I understood the HDR topic correctly, the picture will receive more tonal range... more data in general and I am almost overwhelmed by the results.

Now I also take pictures with the Mavic 2 Pro, which of course makes things even better ... "pro", as the name suggests.

Now to my question: How much difference is there between a HDR photo from the Mavic Air (which consists of 3-5 photos in the 8-bit area) and a normal 10-bit photo of the Mavic 2 Pro. Is the photo of the Pro, because it contains a higher amount of image data, not synonymous already a kind of "HDR"? I know, that there are no under- and overexposed photos, that are normally merged into an HDR-shot, but in 10-bit, the sensor should recognise more light and dark?

I ask, because the Mavic 2 Pro, for example, does not allow rotation of the gimbal for portrait photos and I've photographed my vertical panoramas so far only with 3 normal RAW files. I was very satisfied with the results of the normal RAW, even though it was not taken from a series of 3-5 bracketed shots.

Thanks for tips and hints that help me and maybe others to better understand the topic.

I shoot lots of HDR but only on a tripod, I fear that a drone is not stable enough to keep a sharp pic. With that said I find HDR typically necessary for indoor pics but a nice RAW single image can be processed and copied, then the exposure values can be changed in post processing and then merged for outdoor pics. Even running a single image through a HDR processor makes for a great shot too.

As with my full frame Canon DSLR, the only true RAW files are the Large file size approaching 20mb, the others are closer to TIFF files.

I suspect this might be the case with the Mavic 2 pics as well. So I believe 1 photo will suffice.

 

[sar104]

I shoot lots of HDR but only on a tripod, I fear that a drone is not stable enough to keep a sharp pic. With that said I find HDR typically necessary for indoor pics but a nice RAW single image can be processed and copied, then the exposure values can be changed in post processing and then merged for outdoor pics. Even running a single image through a HDR processor makes for a great shot too.

As with my full frame Canon DSLR, the only true RAW files are the Large file size approaching 20mb, the others are closer to TIFF files.

I suspect this might be the case with the Mavic 2 pics as well. So I believe 1 photo will suffice.

If the platform is stable enough to take one sharp image then a stack is generally not a problem. Alignment is done in the post processing.

 

[thegronz]

I shoot a lot of HDR from a tripod and even the vibration from the mirror flip will affect the sharpness. Even though post processing tries to clean it up, its impossible to do it well enough. I’m going to do an expirement today. I have to shoot HDRs on a home for sale. I will try both ways viz. true bracketing and also post processing bracketing and share the two photos side by side.

I like the single shot quality of the M2! But I can say with assurance that there are position differences between 3 rapid fire drone shots. Maybe not enough difference for our purposes but to the HDR critic they are.

Any ways I will post later sar

See ya

Grons

 

[sar104]

I shoot a lot of HDR from a tripod and even the vibration from the mirror flip will affect the sharpness. Even though post processing tries to clean it up, its impossible to do it well enough. I’m going to do an expirement today. I have to shoot HDRs on a home for sale. I will try both ways viz. true bracketing and also post processing bracketing and share the two photos side by side.

I like the single shot quality of the M2! But I can say with assurance that there are position differences between 3 rapid fire drone shots. Maybe not enough difference for our purposes but to the HDR critic they are.

Any ways I will post later sar

See ya

Grons

The only way mirror vibration is affecting sharpness is if you are using a very long lens. Anyway - either the individual images are sharp or they are not. If they are not sharp then the problem has nothing to do with HDR. If they are sharp then post-processing isn't going to make them sharper, but it is going to align them if there was camera movement between the exposures. That movement doesn't matter unless it is large - you can take perfectly good bracketed shots handheld and let software alignment take care of it - no tripod required.

 

[calmar81]

The only way mirror vibration is affecting sharpness is if you are using a very long lens. Anyway - either the individual images are sharp or they are not. If they are not sharp then the problem has nothing to do with HDR. If they are sharp then post-processing isn't going to make them sharper, but it is going to align them if there was camera movement between the exposures. That movement doesn't matter unless it is large - you can take perfectly good bracketed shots handheld and let software alignment take care of it - no tripod required.

I also experienced, that merging and alignment is done very good in software. Just with moving objects like cars for example, there are some problems, even if Lightroom can eliminate "ghosting" effects.

Does anybody of you know, how much time lies in between the 3 or 5 shots, done by the drones?

 

[thegronz]

The only way mirror vibration is affecting sharpness is if you are using a very long lens. Anyway - either the individual images are sharp or they are not. If they are not sharp then the problem has nothing to do with HDR. If they are sharp then post-processing isn't going to make them sharper, but it is going to align them if there was camera movement between the exposures. That movement doesn't matter unless it is large - you can take perfectly good bracketed shots handheld and let software alignment take care of it - no tripod required.

The issue with post processing alignment is not the sharpness of the photo, it is the micro-meters of difference between the positioning of the photos and how the software has to re-position each photo. Different photos have minute distortion.

The camera flip most certainly does cause vibration on a tripod even if the tripod especially if the tripod is not completely sturdy and tightened down. You’ll see the difference in post processing though I’m just speaking from personal experience.

Again it is impossible to get identical shots especially three in a row in from a moving drone that is vibrating. Each of the three shots are off in either millimeters or less and these differing photos each have unique (non-linear non-identical) distortion.

 

[sar104]

The issue with post processing alignment is not the sharpness of the photo, it is the micro-meters of difference between the positioning of the photos and how the software has to re-position each photo. Different photos have minute distortion.

The camera flip most certainly does cause vibration on a tripod even if the tripod especially if the tripod is not completely sturdy and tightened down. You’ll see the difference in post processing though I’m just speaking from personal experience.

Again it is impossible to get identical shots especially three in a row in from a moving drone that is vibrating. Each of the three shots are off in either millimeters or less and these differing photos each have unique (non-linear non-identical) distortion.

Yes - but the misalignment is fixed in the stack processing - it's the very first step. What kind of software are you using? This is a complete non-issue for most HDR work. If your concern is that the vibration from the shutter is moving the camera between shots (but somehow not motion blurring the individual images?) then that concern is misplaced. Far greater effects arise from movement in the view - wind motion of leaves and branches, objects in motion etc., and the software will use various methods to try to identify and remove the resulting ghosting. I've no clue how you think that you have identified this as an issue, but it isn't.

 

[thegronz]

Yes - but the misalignment is fixed in the stack processing - it's the very first step. What kind of software are you using? This is a complete non-issue for most HDR work. If your concern is that the vibration from the shutter is moving the camera between shots (but somehow not motion blurring the individual images?) then that concern is misplaced. Far greater effects arise from movement in the view - wind motion of leaves and branches, objects in motion etc., and the software will use various methods to try to identify and remove the resulting ghosting. I've no clue how you think that you have identified this as an issue, but it isn't.

I shot some HDR photos with my Canon 6D and will post a true HDR versus an HDR I made in post processing and also a single image that my software did post processing for comparison. I use Easy HDR and Aurora.

I will post later this evening.

Jg

 

[noosaguy]

The results from such a process can considerably improve what is possible from a single shot but the effectiveness can vary depending on the scene, the Mavic's gimbal does a great job stabilising the multiple shots however if there's a lot movement in the scene then the result can be soft in those areas.

I've fount the 5 exposure bracketing to be great when processed in Lightroom Classic. The issue is of course, as you've rightly pointed out, that the process is tricky with longer exposures. Dragging shadow detail out of a small sensor is fraught with problems due to the introduction of noise. I reckon 80% of the images i shoot with my M2P are 5 exposure brackets.