Reading mode: Light Dark

Do you check in-camera Histogram while shooting?

Go to last post
A

Ancient_Mariner

Senior Member
Messages
1,555
Reaction score
2
Location
US
I was wondering if and when you're using your camera's histogram while shooting. I mean, if you have a big, detailed LCD, can't you tell whether you have blown the highlights or not? Same for color histograms.

Especially if shooting in RAW, almost anything (and certainly something you'd spot only on a histogram) is fixable post-shooting.

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/96953368@N00/
 
Ancient_Mariner said:
I was wondering if and when you're using your camera's histogram
while shooting. I mean, if you have a big, detailed LCD, can't you
tell whether you have blown the highlights or not? Same for color
histograms.

Especially if shooting in RAW, almost anything (and certainly
something you'd spot only on a histogram) is fixable post-shooting.
Click to expand...
Even on a good camera LCD, you can't necessarily tell whether detail is blown in bright color areas (particularly reds) so I check the histogram regularly, particularly the first time I move to a new location or target. I generally know from the type of subject whether I'll need +EV or -EV, but checking the histogram is a good verification and it's quick so why not.

--
John
Popular: http://jfriend.smugmug.com/popular
Portfolio: http://jfriend.smugmug.com/portfolio
 
I shoot 80% of the time through the EVF, so I use the histogram a LOT.

--
Coming to you from the beautiful Ozark Mountain Country
where if you're too busy to go fishin', then you're too busy!
 
My Panasonix DMC-LX2 gives me a live histogram, two grids AND shows any areas which will be washed out if I insist on shooting with the settings as they are.
The PASM settings allow me to do exactly as I want.
 
Ancient_Mariner said:
I was wondering if and when you're using your camera's histogram
while shooting. I mean, if you have a big, detailed LCD, can't you
tell whether you have blown the highlights or not? Same for color
histograms.

Especially if shooting in RAW, almost anything (and certainly
something you'd spot only on a histogram) is fixable post-shooting.

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/96953368@N00/
Click to expand...
Be careful judging exposure from the LCD image. It is a JPEG interpretation of the RAW file and not the original. Having said that I always use the histogram to ensure I don't blow the highlights.
 
Yes...
The LCD is NOT a good sample for Exposure judgement...

The Histogram will show you what you have a lot better. Not Perfect..but closer to the real values as a guide for exposure quality.
My camera also shows the RGB values if I want...

And It shows the blown highlights...very useful if you want save the detail here..Just adj the exposure to hold (no flashing highlights) highlights..
--
Peter :-)



Enjoy your photography images, even if your wife doesn't ! ;-(
http://laurence-photography.com/
http://www.pbase.com/peterarbib/
Cameras in profile.
 
I look at composition and light when I take pictures, NOT the histogram!

IMO, histograms are the most overrated feature of a digital camera and often they can be misleading, especially a monochrome type. Histograms are just another crutch for people who don't understand the fundamentals of photography, (Probably never shot film which never used histograms). I am very satisfied with the results I get without using histograms and my eyes and brain tell me more of what I need to know about a scene than a simple little graph could ever do!
--
Glassman
 
KM Glassman said:
I look at composition and light when I take pictures, NOT the histogram!
IMO, histograms are the most overrated feature of a digital camera
and often they can be misleading, especially a monochrome type.
Histograms are just another crutch for people who don't understand
the fundamentals of photography, (Probably never shot film which
never used histograms). I am very satisfied with the results I get
without using histograms and my eyes and brain tell me more of what
I need to know about a scene than a simple little graph could ever do!
Click to expand...
I cannot help but disagree with this. I know how to expose a colour transparency perfectly, often with the aid of a grey card and spot metering. I still find a histogram very useful, especially in conjunction with the 'blinking' under/over exposure display on the LCD play-back. This is especially useful when I am using the 'expose to the right' technique when I deliberately overexpose the photo with the intention of bringing it back during RAW conversion. This technique can really bring out shadow detail and reduces noise especially in the dark areas of the picture.

The histogram is no substitute for an understanding of correct exposure, it is another aid to achieving it.

--
Greg

When you've got a moment, have a look at my newly updated site including my blog:
http://www.wrightphotos.co.uk
also http://www.wrightphotos.co.uk/FromeInFocus

Winner of the South West Rural section of the BBC's Picture of Britain Competition.
 
Yes - I use it all the time. But I use the over exposure warning flashes even more. If I see any I then retake the image with some under exposure.

--
Roland
 
Have a website? Intrigued by your work (words).

Z.
KM Glassman said:
I look at composition and light when I take pictures, NOT the histogram!
IMO, histograms are the most overrated feature of a digital camera
and often they can be misleading, especially a monochrome type.
Histograms are just another crutch for people who don't understand
the fundamentals of photography, (Probably never shot film which
never used histograms). I am very satisfied with the results I get
without using histograms and my eyes and brain tell me more of what
I need to know about a scene than a simple little graph could ever do!
--
Glassman
Click to expand...
--
http://www.albertzablit.com
 
KM Glassman said:
I look at composition and light when I take pictures, NOT the histogram!
IMO, histograms are the most overrated feature of a digital camera
and often they can be misleading, especially a monochrome type.
Histograms are just another crutch for people who don't understand
the fundamentals of photography, (Probably never shot film which
never used histograms). I am very satisfied with the results I get
without using histograms and my eyes and brain tell me more of what
I need to know about a scene than a simple little graph could ever do!
--
Glassman
Click to expand...
Hi - so you know it all :)

You know that people using the histogram don´t understand the fundamentals of photography - and probably never shoot any film.

Sorry - but you are wrong. I use the histogram. And I assure you that I both understands and have shoot lots of film.

--
Roland
 
It's a very helpful tool when shooting whitewater photos. No in camera metering system works well for this type of photography. I shoot in manual exposure mode and check the histogram when I start shooting and again if the light seems to have changed.
 
KM Glassman said:
Histograms are just another crutch for people who don't understand
the fundamentals of photography, (Probably never shot film which
never used histograms).
Click to expand...
And probably never bracketed each shot 5 times to ensure at least one of them was good. And probably never missed the exposure by half a stop with neg film and then corrected it in the darkroom.
KM Glassman said:
I am very satisfied with the results I get
without using histograms and my eyes and brain tell me more of what
I need to know about a scene than a simple little graph could ever do!
Click to expand...
Really? Most people find that their eyes and brain mislead them considerably about what a scene is really like, hence why light meters exist.

--
Andy Farrell
http://www.caerphoto.com/
http://flickr.com/photos/caerphoto/
 
Although I use the histogram as an additional exposure tool, it is my understanding that it is not an exact interpretation of the what the RAW file will capture. But rather the "in" camera adjustment reading that will be used to save to the JPG format. Your RAW file will still have more latitude (and of course no compression artifacts) leaving some room for additional adjustment/correction latitude when downloaded to your computer software.
 
DON'T know HOW to read a histogram because you are smarter than the camera....

And BTW....The Camera can read only record a Dynamic Range of about 6 -7 stops....YOU BRAIN AND EYES can SEE MUCH MORE Dynamic Range than ANY CAMERA ON THE MARKET....Including "FILM"...any Film..
So your brain will come with a wrong conclusion in some exposure evaluations

The Histogram is YOUR LIGHT METER in a graphic form, instead of an analog form.

I guess YOU NEVER have changed you camera settings to allow for Human Error on your part....

Do you have a web site with some of your work ??? Let the Pictures Speak on how good your technique is...You don't Edit do you....Your Files should be perfect from the camera....

Well, you asked for it....This Is DPReview....the place where people can get very nasty and do at times at those that make "Stupid" statements.

BTW....I too have shoot 1,000's of rolls film in my life ----Still have 2 film camera's I use to this day...(I'm 54....been shooting with film since I was 14 years old. I could teach you a thing or two...If you get off your ego trip).

Cheers
Peter
KM Glassman said:
I look at composition and light when I take pictures, NOT the histogram!
IMO, histograms are the most overrated feature of a digital camera
and often they can be misleading, especially a monochrome type.
Histograms are just another crutch for people who don't understand
the fundamentals of photography, (Probably never shot film which
never used histograms). I am very satisfied with the results I get
without using histograms and my eyes and brain tell me more of what
I need to know about a scene than a simple little graph could ever do!
--
Glassman
Click to expand...
--
Peter :-)



Enjoy your photography images, even if your wife doesn't ! ;-(
http://laurence-photography.com/
http://www.pbase.com/peterarbib/
Cameras in profile.
 
ignorance is a bliss sometimes
KM Glassman said:
I look at composition and light when I take pictures, NOT the histogram!
IMO, histograms are the most overrated feature of a digital camera
and often they can be misleading, especially a monochrome type.
Histograms are just another crutch for people who don't understand
the fundamentals of photography, (Probably never shot film which
never used histograms). I am very satisfied with the results I get
without using histograms and my eyes and brain tell me more of what
I need to know about a scene than a simple little graph could ever do!
--
Glassman
Click to expand...
--
Regards,
Arun Sasidharan

Home Page: http://www.asasidh.com

Photos: http://flickr.com/photos/arunsasi/

Blog: http://www.zenslr.com/
 
Well ,I must say that I never do.I personaly try to expose the old fashioned way.If I'll be taking a photo of a subject in front of a bright light source or very dark then obviously there will be blow out areas at the histogram.I shoot basicaly the way I used to with a film SLR plus with digital gear one can always take extra few pics if needed.
--
Berghof G.C.
 
..more than any other indicator of proper exposure and for spotting blown highlights.
So yes, I use it constantly while shooting.

Don
http://www.pbase.com/dond
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top