Overexposing V Underexposing

Started Feb 10, 2013 | Discussions thread
nixda
Senior MemberPosts: 1,916Gear list
Like?
Re: Overexposing V Underexposing
In reply to tiberiousgracchus, Feb 12, 2013

tiberiousgracchus wrote:

Christof21 wrote:

Christof21 wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exposing_to_the_right

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/expose-right.shtml

These are 2 ref that explain why and how you can avoid noise in shadows

That said the Fuji X's produce very little noise anyway

So nowadays this applies for the few shots where deep shadows are important

-- hide signature --

Good judgment comes from experience
Experience comes from bad judgment

You mean that it is not a good idea to use dr@200 or 400, it would be better in fact to have the opposite function in the camera (overexpose and correct it) !
I don't know what to think...

I am not sure what DR200 or DR400 does, but as long as you are not blowing highlights, you should try to shoot as bright as you can.

That is the expose-to-the-right theory.

it just makes the opposite, under-expose 1 or 2 stops and correct it as utomatically. It preserves the highlights.
Mayber I under-estimate the importance of the sky in a picture but I prefer to preserve shadows and have less noise.
The article is vert interesting !

I believe(d) in the exposure to right theory. however after seeing what the camera is capable of im no longer afraid of overexposing. The links in the original post is and exaggerated example but it goes to show that blown out highlights does not neccessarily mean loss of detail. With my Canon blown highlight meant you could not retrieve the info but with the X100 its still possible.

Two things to say here:

1. whether one has to underexpose to do ETTR or overexpose to do ETTR is irrelevant as the end result is still ETTR.

2. 'Recovering blown highlights' is a misnomer. If highlights can be recovered, then they weren't blown. At least not in all channels. Highlights can be 'recovered' from raw data relative to the JPEG version when the conversion to JPEG was done suboptimally and clipped them. If the engine did the JPEG conversion 'correctly', i.e., if it had preserved the highlights, one would not need to recover anything. So, the ability to recover highlights in a piece of software is simply a capability to utilize the portion of the raw data that's been tossed out when converting to JPEG. If you can't recover highlights from your Canon raw files, relative to the JPEG versions, the JPEG engine did a much better job. IMO, that's a hallmark of a good engine. Being able to recover, say, 4 stops of highlights is a hallmark of a suboptimal engine.

 nixda's gear list:nixda's gear list
Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 27mm F2.8
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow