• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / GFX 100 II / In-camera black point subtraction

In-camera black point subtraction

October 24, 2023 JimK 5 Comments

This is the 23rd post in a series of tests of the Fujifilm GFX 100, Mark II. You can find all the posts in this series by going to the Categories pane in the right hand panel and clicking on “GFX 100 II”. It’s also of more general use, so I’ve tagged it with “The Last Word” as well.

A decade or more ago, it was common to see cameras subtracting the black point before writing the raw data to the flash card. I never like it. The first reason has nothing to do with normal photography: it made the cameras harder to test. The second reason is philosophical: I believe that no operation should be done in-camera that can be done at least as well in postproduction. I have many reasons for thinking this way. More computer resources are available in post. As better algorithms are developed, you can go back to your old raw files and invoke them, possibly getting better results. You can use algorithms that are interactive, tweaking parameters for best results with individual files and specific intents. For all those reasons, I was happy when the camera manufacturers stopped subtracting the black point in the camera.

When I write image processing programs, I almost always use floating point, and carry along negative values until the last possible moment, when I switch to unsigned integer precision to write the output file. That gives me the maximum flexibility, but I’m not writing code that places a high priority on either a small computing footprint or fast processing speed. I can see why some demosaicing algorithms might work better if they had visibility to the whole image, including both sides of the black point, but I don’t know enough about the demosaicing algorithms used in Lr and C1 to say whether they work better if the black point is not subtracted in camera.

When the values below the black point are lopped off the way the GFX 100 II does at ISO 80, it has the effect of raising the mean values near black higher than they should be. I don’t know if that has any bad effects on real world photography.

And then there’s the situation where the camera doing the black point subtraction gets it wrong. The Leica M240 screwed up the black point subtraction, causing the shadows to go green. There was no postproduction fix for that until someone wrote a program to apply a digital bandaid.

I’ve never seen a camera do what the GFX 100 II does, which is subtract (part of) the black point for one ISO setting, and not perform the subtraction for the other ISO settings. I struggle to imagine what was going through the Fujifilm engineers’ heads when they decided to do that.

Now that we know more about what the GFX 100 II does at ISO 80, should we use that ISO setting? I think so, but if you start to see shadow color shifts with heroic lifting, it’s probably a good idea to switch to ISO 100 and use the calibration tools in Lightroom and Adobe Camera Raw.

GFX 100 II, The Last Word

← The reason for the GFZ 100 II ISO 80 unusually good read noise GFX 100 II shadow noise at ISO 80, SS and CH →

Comments

  1. Dan Kennedy says

    May 17, 2024 at 5:16 pm

    What was going through the Fujifilm engineers heads was similar to what was going through Volkswagen’s engineers heads when they scammed the diesel emissions tests.

    They realised most of the DR testing online tests recoverability of the shadows, so they pulled the ISO100 file down in exposure to put more detail into the shadows, and clipped the black point to fool the tests for photographic dynamic range.

    This is all so they can claim “30% higher dynamic range” and lie about having a new sensor to sell cameras.
    I honestly think the market regulators should put Fujifilm to task and get them to prove it’s a new sensor and in my opinion they will be found out and have to give partial refunds to all the consumers they’ve lied to.

    Reply
  2. Liam says

    February 19, 2025 at 12:46 am

    Great analysis across a number of posts, but a few questions I’m not clear on. Does ISO 80 provide more dynamic range than ISO 100? Also, does the GFX 100 II have faster readout in stills versus the older cameras or is faster readout limited to video only? Will the GFX 100 II suffer from rolling shutter or other artefacts when in CH mode or is the drop down to 12 bit precision sufficient to keep up with 8 FPS?

    Reply
    • JimK says

      February 19, 2025 at 8:43 am

      Does ISO 80 provide more dynamic range than ISO 100?

      Marginally.

      Reply
    • JimK says

      February 19, 2025 at 8:44 am

      …does the GFX 100 II have faster readout in stills versus the older cameras …

      Yes, in some modes. Not in general.

      Reply
    • JimK says

      February 19, 2025 at 8:45 am

      Will the GFX 100 II suffer from rolling shutter or other artefacts when in CH mode or is the drop down to 12 bit precision sufficient to keep up with 8 FPS?

      I don’t see what frame rate has to do with rolling shutter.

      Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • JimK on How Sensor Noise Scales with Exposure Time
  • Štěpán Kaňa on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Štěpán Kaňa on How Sensor Noise Scales with Exposure Time
  • JimK on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Geofrey on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • JimK on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Geofrey on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Javier Sanchez on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?
  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.