So which one is right?
Discussion
Stupid problem this, but I really don't know the answer! So here's an example:
I take a photo with my Nikon D7100 and assume the exposure should be correct for my subject (particularly if spot metering is used on the subject). I load it into my computer, which I can adjust the brightness of the screen on (problem 1: Which screen brightness shows me what the camera should have produced?) Then I upload the image to Lightroom and hit the 'auto' button for exposure etc. (problem 2: It either under/over or lightly tweaks my original image. So which one is right, Lightroom or camera?). Next I might also open the same image in Photoshop (problem 3: Photoshop shows my image at a different brightness to Lightroom). So where on earth does this leave me when trying to produce the perfect exposure on my screen, so that when I send the image to a printers like Photobox, it comes back perfectly exposed? HELP!!!
(I might add that I don't necessarily use 'auto' on Lightroom, but regardless, I still don't know if what I'm looking at and tweaking is actually making the image straight from camera worse)
I take a photo with my Nikon D7100 and assume the exposure should be correct for my subject (particularly if spot metering is used on the subject). I load it into my computer, which I can adjust the brightness of the screen on (problem 1: Which screen brightness shows me what the camera should have produced?) Then I upload the image to Lightroom and hit the 'auto' button for exposure etc. (problem 2: It either under/over or lightly tweaks my original image. So which one is right, Lightroom or camera?). Next I might also open the same image in Photoshop (problem 3: Photoshop shows my image at a different brightness to Lightroom). So where on earth does this leave me when trying to produce the perfect exposure on my screen, so that when I send the image to a printers like Photobox, it comes back perfectly exposed? HELP!!!
(I might add that I don't necessarily use 'auto' on Lightroom, but regardless, I still don't know if what I'm looking at and tweaking is actually making the image straight from camera worse)
Never trust your camera to get the exposure right. Always use the histogram so you can see exactly where the whites, blacks and midtones are and where they should be. You can also see this in Levels in PS. Calibrate your monitor so that what it shows you is accurate (that's what a 'monitor' originally was). Treat 'Auto' (whether exposure or WB) with caution - sometimes it does a great job, at others quite the reverse. It all depends on the shot. As for getting your prints back how you expect, ultimately there can be a bit of trial and error but remember the settings that work and eventually you should crack it.
Simpo Two said:
Never trust your camera to get the exposure right. Always use the histogram so you can see exactly where the whites, blacks and midtones are and where they should be. You can also see this in Levels in PS. Calibrate your monitor so that what it shows you is accurate (that's what a 'monitor' originally was). Treat 'Auto' (whether exposure or WB) with caution - sometimes it does a great job, at others quite the reverse. It all depends on the shot. As for getting your prints back how you expect, ultimately there can be a bit of trial and error but remember the settings that work and eventually you should crack it.
Thank you John. So the best bet is to learn about histograms! I've looked these up on YouTube, but still don't really get it. So, any advice on the best place to start with this?My basic understanding of histograms (and it is basic) is that a perfect one is like a hill, dead center with nothing either side, never going to happen unless you have the perfect environment.
Keeping it very basic, as long as you don't clip either edge of the graph (which is unrecoverable loss, either too dark or too light), then you have something to work with and/or be able to look at and adjust.
I think there are a few of the photographic books out there that do describe histograms but you may be better looking on google or youtube to start with
Keeping it very basic, as long as you don't clip either edge of the graph (which is unrecoverable loss, either too dark or too light), then you have something to work with and/or be able to look at and adjust.
I think there are a few of the photographic books out there that do describe histograms but you may be better looking on google or youtube to start with
The left side of the histogram represents black, the right side white. Midtones (the rest of the image) go in-between. Dark scenes or underexposure therefore skew the graph to the left; light scenes or overexposure skew it to the right.
tonyb1968 said:
My basic understanding of histograms (and it is basic) is that a perfect one is like a hill, dead center with nothing either side, never going to happen unless you have the perfect environment. Keeping it very basic, as long as you don't clip either edge of the graph (which is unrecoverable loss, either too dark or too light), then you have something to work with and/or be able to look at and adjust.
That's true but does get overridden by reality - not every histogram is like a hill with the peak in the middle. It depends entirely on what the subject is. If the subject is quite dark then the bulk of the hill can be to the left and vice versa. Generally you try to get all the 'hill' between the sides BUT sometimes you let highlights go (ie off to the right). Glints of sun on water or glassware is a common example - if you expose for those the rest of the photo will be virtually black, so in the interests of reality you let those 'specular highlights' burn out and concentrate on the rest of the subject. Every photo has a different histogram!This is why I get confused! A high key studio portrait of a blonde wearing white with a white backdrop would surely show a very steep climb to the right and virtually empty on the left, yet the image would be correctly exposed...there's just no black/little mid tones. No doubt 'auto' in PS would under expose it.
bernhund said:
This is why I get confused! A high key studio portrait of a blonde wearing white with a white backdrop would surely show a very steep climb to the right and virtually empty on the left, yet the image would be correctly exposed...there's just no black/little mid tones.
Correct. A pure white background would either be a spike mashed up against the right hand side or you might not even see it. What you're looking for is the small hill that represents the subject. To be visible, the woman's white clothing would technically be very light grey, at least where it meets the background. At this point you'd probably wish you'd used a black background!Once you get the image into PS you can use Levels to push the 'hill' left or right - you'll see the effect it has - and Curves to increase particular areas of it. That's a very simplistic explanation and I'm not a PS expert by any means, but it works for me.
Simpo Two said:
bernhund said:
This is why I get confused! A high key studio portrait of a blonde wearing white with a white backdrop would surely show a very steep climb to the right and virtually empty on the left, yet the image would be correctly exposed...there's just no black/little mid tones.
Correct. A pure white background would either be a spike mashed up against the right hand side or you might not even see it. What you're looking for is the small hill that represents the subject. To be visible, the woman's white clothing would technically be very light grey, at least where it meets the background. At this point you'd probably wish you'd used a black background!Once you get the image into PS you can use Levels to push the 'hill' left or right - you'll see the effect it has - and Curves to increase particular areas of it. That's a very simplistic explanation and I'm not a PS expert by any means, but it works for me.
bernhund said:
I need PS lessons! And maybe something better than a 17in laptop!
It doesn't need to be bigger, just calibrated so you know where 'right' is. Don't be overwhelmed by PS, it's massively complex and I doubt anyone knows absolutely all of it. Just look for and take the bits you need to make your images look their best - maybe 2%.Calibrating your monitor for correct brightness is quite a mission.
You have to take into account ambient light ( keep this the same or use a light level monitor), also what you are printing on ( which paper makes a difference) and the assumed light levels of any viewing of the print (most 'good' competitions that judge prints will have very strict guidelines for this bit - 'viewing booths').
All of that is too complicated for the mere mortal. So adjust based on the image and the histogram.
I say based on the image because one of my astro images will have quite a different 'correct' curve to say a high key portrait.
Once you think you have it right do a test print (either your own or a commercial one somewhere you will use/trust. Often its best to do a set of test prints ( a5 etc is enough) so you can get an idea of a range of images and histograms.
You have to take into account ambient light ( keep this the same or use a light level monitor), also what you are printing on ( which paper makes a difference) and the assumed light levels of any viewing of the print (most 'good' competitions that judge prints will have very strict guidelines for this bit - 'viewing booths').
All of that is too complicated for the mere mortal. So adjust based on the image and the histogram.
I say based on the image because one of my astro images will have quite a different 'correct' curve to say a high key portrait.
Once you think you have it right do a test print (either your own or a commercial one somewhere you will use/trust. Often its best to do a set of test prints ( a5 etc is enough) so you can get an idea of a range of images and histograms.
Oh and as to 'correct' exposure at capture time its quite a large subject too...
I try and expose to the right as much as possible in landscapes but without killing any important hilites, you pull the exposure back in post if needed, this is technically a better approach than exposing it for a 'SOOC' shot (or under exposing).
Mostly though dont trust the cameras metering. Especially spot meter as small changes in where you aim it can make huge differences in the exposure.
I try and expose to the right as much as possible in landscapes but without killing any important hilites, you pull the exposure back in post if needed, this is technically a better approach than exposing it for a 'SOOC' shot (or under exposing).
Mostly though dont trust the cameras metering. Especially spot meter as small changes in where you aim it can make huge differences in the exposure.
RobDickinson said:
Mostly though dont trust the cameras metering. Especially spot meter as small changes in where you aim it can make huge differences in the exposure.
I use centre-weighted and adjust from there. It meters on the focus point selected and as that's usually the most important part it works well.Simpo Two said:
I use centre-weighted and adjust from there. It meters on the focus point selected and as that's usually the most important part it works well.But if you are in any metered mode (aka outside of M mode without auto iso) you need to help the metering even so. A dark bar scene will need -exp comp, skiing will need + exp comp
Simpo Two said:
RobDickinson said:
But if you are in any metered mode (aka outside of M mode without auto iso) you need to help the metering even so. A dark bar scene will need -exp comp, skiing will need + exp comp
Yes, I'm a great fan of +/-EV.RobDickinson said:
Ev comp changes the exposure, shutter speed or aperture so it's not the same as doing things in post.
What you are doing is telling the meter it's actually lighter or darker
I'm sorry Rob, I just have one of those quizzical brains! So EV will adjust aperture and/or shutter speed to compensate? Does that then take away the shutter/aperture that you wanted/planned, when you could over/under expose by bracketing?What you are doing is telling the meter it's actually lighter or darker
bernhund said:
I'm sorry Rob, I just have one of those quizzical brains! So EV will adjust aperture and/or shutter speed to compensate? Does that then take away the shutter/aperture that you wanted/planned, when you could over/under expose by bracketing?
If you are in any sort of auto mode that is using the metering the camera is adjusting some values for you. this is what gets changed with exp comp.So in aperture priority mode you control the aperture, the camera/meter controls the exposure via shutter speed (and sometimes iso).
If you are in shutter priority the metering will change aperture where it can or ISO if its allowed.
If you are in true manual mode the exp comp does nothing
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff