-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Exposure Compensation
- Thread starter Vin60
- Start date
-
- Tags
- canon eos 60d
TDR1
Leading Member
I have no idea why this would be. Can you post some photos as examples? How are you shooting, i.e. what camera mode, are you using flash etc.
Thanks Adrian,
I am in Manual mode and with zero compensation the picture seems flat almost a bit overexposed during daytime (no flash). Then I have to decrease shutter speed and that shifts the exposure to minus side to get some good contrast. No before pictures at the moment but I will post them sometime later this week.
I am in Manual mode and with zero compensation the picture seems flat almost a bit overexposed during daytime (no flash). Then I have to decrease shutter speed and that shifts the exposure to minus side to get some good contrast. No before pictures at the moment but I will post them sometime later this week.
Flying Fish
Senior Member
I'm not sure I understand the concept of exposure compensation in manual mode; in M mode, you set the shutter speed, aperture, and ISO. Have you tried shooting in Av, Tv, or even green auto mode? Are you shooting JPEG or raw? So many questions....
FF
FF
tonyjr
Veteran Member
I have had to many shots overexposed . Blow out a shot - you are screwed - to dark and you can lighten .
Y0GI
Veteran Member
"Contrast" is one of the basic settings in the Picture Style. Have you tried adjusting it there?
Sailor Blue
Forum Pro
Turn on the Highlight Alert. If you really are overexposing your images any overexposed area will blink when you look at the image on the camera LCD.
Non-important highlights such as reflections of the sun from chrome or windows should be blinking but things like a face should not be blinking.
Things like white shirts are difficult to keep from being overexposed and using the Highlight Alert can help you avoid this. Sometimes white objects must be overexposed to keep the exposure for the main subject correct.
The sky is very difficult to keep from being overexposed if the exposure is correct for a subject in the shade.
You can't simply depend on the camera meter always being correct. You have to look at a scene and make a judgment on what should be properly exposed and what can be overexposed or underexposed. The Highlight Alert is very helpful for this.
Non-important highlights such as reflections of the sun from chrome or windows should be blinking but things like a face should not be blinking.
Things like white shirts are difficult to keep from being overexposed and using the Highlight Alert can help you avoid this. Sometimes white objects must be overexposed to keep the exposure for the main subject correct.
The sky is very difficult to keep from being overexposed if the exposure is correct for a subject in the shade.
You can't simply depend on the camera meter always being correct. You have to look at a scene and make a judgment on what should be properly exposed and what can be overexposed or underexposed. The Highlight Alert is very helpful for this.
Hm. There's literally no such thing as exposure compensation in manual mode. Exposure compensation is a setting (usually controlled by the rear dial) that only applies to automatic and semi-automatic modes: P, Av, and Tv. The point is to override the exposure that was automatically computed by the camera.
So whatever you think you're doing, you're not setting exposure compensation.
I think you might be best off telling us exactly what buttons you're pushing.
Solution
Limburger
Veteran Member
The way I use EC is for a full shot when the metering isn't reliable.
In case of a subject (and therefore the full image isn't my subject, only my subject in the frame matters) I move to spot metering for good exposure of that subject and subject only, avoiding EC because it will affect the full image.
So far it works for me.
Any better methods I will absolutly try myself. So I am open suggestions, this probably isn't the only way.
Happy 2013 everybody!
In case of a subject (and therefore the full image isn't my subject, only my subject in the frame matters) I move to spot metering for good exposure of that subject and subject only, avoiding EC because it will affect the full image.
So far it works for me.
Any better methods I will absolutly try myself. So I am open suggestions, this probably isn't the only way.
Happy 2013 everybody!
Last edited:
G
guy schlacter
Guest
WilbaW
Forum Pro
Your confusing how you do it with what it is. The last sentence above is correct - exposure compensation is using different settings than what the meter wants, to get a darker or brighter image. It doesn't matter whether you are choosing values for all the settings or you are delegating the setting of one or more to the camera, it's the deviation that matters and that's displayed the same way in all modes.
In the olden days you could only change the luminous exposure (aperture x shutter duration) with the camera settings, but now that we can change the ISO shot-to-shot, the "exposure" in "exposure compensation" is anachronistic. It's better to think of "metering compensation" or "image brightness compensation".
How you do compensation does depend on the shooting mode. In M the meter shows you how far your settings deviate from what the meter wants for the light it can see (static settings, dynamic deviation). In Av, etc. the meter shows you how far you have chosen the setting(s) to deviate from what the meter wants for the light it can see (static deviation, dynamic settings).
Here's a little exercise you can do that helps understanding. Camera on a tripod, steady illumination, Tv, EC=0. Trigger metering, then go to M and replicate the settings. Back in Tv, apply some compensation, e.g. -1. Back in M, do exactly what you did in Tv to apply the compensation - touch the same controls in the same way, same number of clicks. If you put your finger over the Shooting Mode display, can you tell which mode you're in?
Canon only mentions exposure compensation in their camera manuals in reference to how to do it in semi-auto modes, and many people fall into the trap of thinking that's what it is. If you're convinced it's a modern phenomenon, applicable only to digital cameras with semi-auto and auto modes, check out what Ansel Adams was saying about it in the 1940s.
I'm not confused at all. When a user writes something like "exposure compensation" in the same sentence as "manual mode", to me it is a red flag that the user doesn't understand some of the basics (*). And most likely, in my experience, there's a misconception somewhere, and what the user wrote is not really what is happening. I hate going on wild goose chases, trying to troubleshoot a problem, when the original description of the problem turns out not to be accurate.
The most important thing to note, I think, is that there was no discussion of metering modes. I think responding to the OP is pure speculation until we know how he metered. For example, if you're accidentally in spot mode, point the spot at the darkest part of your scene, and meter to 0 on the readout, then other parts of your scene (if it's contrasty) are likely to be blown out.
(*) special exception for discussion about the desire for EC in relation to auto-ISO in manual mode! (which is not nonsense and has several threads devoted to it...)
WilbaW
Forum Pro
What did you see when you tried the exercise I gave? What did you see?
What part of "I am in Manual mode" is ambiguous?
elfroggio
Senior Member
Sorry to butt in, but manual mode and exposure compensation do not work together in the Canon world. You cannot be in manual and use +1EV or -2EV, everything has to be set manually in manual mode.
Or I misunderstand or I'm missing something...
WilbaW
Forum Pro
It would be pretty boring around here if no-one ever did.
Only if you use an invalid definition of exposure compensation, one based on how you do it in semi-auto modes, rather than what it actually is and has always been since the dawn of photography.
Sure you can - you set everything manually so that the meter shows you +1EV or -2EV. Thus you have compensated the image brightness by deviating from what the meter wants.
In manual the settings are fixed and the deviation is variable, whereas in semi-automatic modes the settings are variable and the deviation is fixed. It doesn't make any different to the appearance of the images which way you did it, +1 is +1 and -2 is -2, whether you are in M or Av.
The compensation is the +1 or -2, not the mode or method by which you obtained it, or what happens when the light or scene changes (what it is, not how you do it).
Oh boy, here we go. The answer is "the part where he does not mention if he is using evaluative, partial, spot, or center-weighted average metering". Please see page 119 of the 60D manual for a basic explanation of what these metering modes do. If you think "manual mode" is a metering mode, then you are more confused than the OP. We've determined the OP is using the in-viewinder meter in M mode to gauge his settings. The metering mode has a massive effect on what shows up on the viewfinder's meter.
If you doubt me, try this experiment: Put your black lens cap on a white piece of paper. Go to M mode, and make sure auto-ISO is disabled. Set your camera to spot metering mode (again, please see page 119 for info on how to do this). Fill the viewfinder with the sheet of paper, with the black lens cap under the spot meter, and adjust shutter or aperture so the meter reads 0. Now, change the metering mode to center-weighted average. Frame the same photo and look at your meter now. It probably reads +2.
I see that you were trying to prove you can take the same looking photo in both modes. That's a totally obvious point which we all know. However, please note you botched the specs for your "experiment". If you turn the dial counterclockwise in Tv mode you are applying negative EC, which effectively tightens the aperture (higher F number) and results in a darker picture. If you turn the dial counterclockwise in M mode you are decreasing the F number, meaning a wider aperture, and a brighter picture. So the answer is "yes, I can tell which was shot in which mode because the one in M mode is 2 stops brighter".
Even if you reverse the direction of the dial in M mode, your "experiment" only works because you rigged it by using Tv mode instead of Av mode (or P mode). In Tv mode the rear dial controls exposure compensation, which effectively means a change in aperture. In M mode, the rear dial is the aperture control. So they match. But had you used Av mode, it would be even more obvious which photo was shot in which mode, because exposure compensation for Av mode indirectly alters the shutter - not the aperture. So you're changing the shutter in Av mode, but the aperture in M mode by rotating the rear dial. The M and Av photos will have completely different DOF.
Of course they all affect exposure in the end, but the ergonomics are radically different, and the on-screen information means something different in semi-automatic modes and manual modes. Avoiding confusion like yours and the OPs is probably the reason none of the camera manufacturers use the terminology "exposure compensation" when they are simply talking about metering away from 0 in manual mode.
Last edited:
WilbaW
Forum Pro
Sorry, one track mind. I'm with you now.
LOL, right. No, I'm only talking about, "There's literally no such thing as exposure compensation in manual mode." EC is independent of metering mode, so that's irrelevant.
True, but not on what +1 or -2 means. Zero can be anywhere the meter tells you it is, and if the meter shows 0 you have not applied any compensation. What matters is how far you are away from wherever it is.
Great. So you understand how deviating from the what the meter wants by the same amount has the same effect on image brightness regardless of the shooting mode. If you call that "exposure compensation" in semi-auto modes, what do you call it in M?
Makes you feel good when you think you've "got" someone on a tiny procedural point, doesn't it? As if that makes everything they've said invalid.
It's good that you spotted the deliberate error, now I know that you actually tried it (unless you have C. Fn IV-3 = 1, like I do). Too bad the point is irrelevant.
Please explain how "1/60 | F8.0 | ISO 200 | -1" in Av means something different for image brightness compared to the same values in M.
On the contrary, the OP made perfect sense to me, since (as you acknowledge above), -1 in any shooting mode is as bright as -1 in any other shooting mode using the same metering mode, and therefore exposure compensation is shooting and metering mode-independent.
Aaaaaand back we come to the beginning. They aren't explaining what it is, they are explaining how to do it.
Look up some definitions of exposure compensation from prior to 1938. (Bonus points for knowing why 1938.)
"Exposing". Look, you're on your own here in terms of terminology. Google for "exposure compensation" and "manual mode" and "canon" together, and you'll see similar threads everywhere, where all the responses say exposure compensation has nothing to do with manual mode. And you can take a look at page 120 of the 60d manual, titled "Setting Exposure Compensation". Point #1, in big bold letters, says "Set the mode dial to <P>, <Tv>, or <Av>". Note <M> is not on the list. I don't think many people agree with you, including Canon.
I don't care what happened in 1938 or what Ansel Adams wrote about "exposure compensation" (which, incidentally, I believe is precisely nil, but I might be mistaken). Exposure compensation is not the terminology anybody, in 2013, uses to explain the metering in manual shooting modes on a modern camera.
This is completely off track from the OPs problem which is that he's (presumably) blowing out his photos. What the feature is called doesn't matter. What metering mode he is using DOES matter, because that needle pointing to 0 or -1 or -2 means something entirely different, depending on his metering mode.
No, I was just trying to respond to your condescending attempt to make me try little experiments to understand the basics of exposure. I thought it was amusing, in your attempt to belittle me, that your experiment made exactly the opposite point you were trying to make.Makes you feel good when you think you've "got" someone on a tiny procedural point, doesn't it? As if that makes everything they've said invalid.
ROFL
Actually, I admit I did not actually try it. Haven't touched my camera since a family event photo shoot yesterday. I know how my camera works like the back of my hand, and didn't need to turn it on to know your example was backwards and nonsense.
It doesn't mean a difference in image brightness for that one shot. There is a difference in ergonomics and workflow when the needle is pointing to -1. In Av mode it means that every time you snap the shutter, the camera's going to adjust the shutter speed to make sure the image is 1 stop darker than the standard exposure calculation (based on your metering mode). The shutter speed changes every time, and you get consistent brightness across photos: always 1 stop darker than standard calculations.
By contrast, in M mode it means what you are CURRENTLY pointing at is 1 stop darker than the standard exposure calculation. But every time you release the shutter after that, the brightness will be different unless you keep shooting exactly the same subject in the same lighting. Recompose and you're no longer at -1. Wait until a cloud passes overhead, or the sun's position changes, and you're no longer at -1. Your settings in no way guarantee the brightness of your image, other than the one you're shooting immediately. That's probably why nobody calls this "exposure compensation"
Per my note above, I don't think anybody cares about 1938 terminology, even if you're right about it (so I am not going to bother asking for references).
I think most people are more interested in the OP's metering problem than the argument over philosophy and terminology. I'll say again that the OP's nonstandard terminology is a sign that he might not accurately describing his problem. And more importantly, lack of any info about metering mode means there is no way we can solve his problem.
You both have some valid arguments. However, although I am quite long in the tooth, I agree with Topaz that we should stick with terminology that is current today. Most photographers wouldn't now talk about EC in Manual mode whatever meaning it might have had in 1938! It is generally accepted that EC means using the methods in the user manual to override settings that have been chosen by the camera in one of the modes mentioned by the manual. The manual doesn't envisage EC in M mode.
You could argue (unconvincingly IMHO) that EC is seeing momentarily an indication that the settings you have dialled in M mode deviate from what the camera wants. That would mean little to 99% of photographers, especially the OP who, correct me if I'm wrong, appears to be getting to grips with his first DSLR.
I agree with those who find it difficult to follow what the OP means by EC if he's in Manual mode. He should explain exactly what he means and then someone could help him. He's a new member and he's very welcome to this forum. The spat below between 2 established members isn't going to make him feel very welcome.
-- Phil Wallace www.birdmad.co.uk
You could argue (unconvincingly IMHO) that EC is seeing momentarily an indication that the settings you have dialled in M mode deviate from what the camera wants. That would mean little to 99% of photographers, especially the OP who, correct me if I'm wrong, appears to be getting to grips with his first DSLR.
I agree with those who find it difficult to follow what the OP means by EC if he's in Manual mode. He should explain exactly what he means and then someone could help him. He's a new member and he's very welcome to this forum. The spat below between 2 established members isn't going to make him feel very welcome.
-- Phil Wallace www.birdmad.co.uk
Topaz wrote:
"Exposing". Look, you're on your own here in terms of terminology. Google for "exposure compensation" and "manual mode" and "canon" together, and you'll see similar threads everywhere, where all the responses say exposure compensation has nothing to do with manual mode. And you can take a look at page 120 of the 60d manual, titled "Setting Exposure Compensation". Point #1, in big bold letters, says "Set the mode dial to <P>, <Tv>, or <Av>". Note <M> is not on the list. I don't think many people agree with you, including Canon.
I don't care what happened in 1938 or what Ansel Adams wrote about "exposure compensation" (which, incidentally, I believe is precisely nil, but I might be mistaken). Exposure compensation is not the terminology anybody, in 2013, uses to explain the metering in manual shooting modes on a modern camera.
This is completely off track from the OPs problem which is that he's (presumably) blowing out his photos. What the feature is called doesn't matter. What metering mode he is using DOES matter, because that needle pointing to 0 or -1 or -2 means something entirely different, depending on his metering mode.
No, I was just trying to respond to your condescending attempt to make me try little experiments to understand the basics of exposure. I thought it was amusing, in your attempt to belittle me, that your experiment made exactly the opposite point you were trying to make.Makes you feel good when you think you've "got" someone on a tiny procedural point, doesn't it? As if that makes everything they've said invalid.
ROFL
Actually, I admit I did not actually try it. Haven't touched my camera since a family event photo shoot yesterday. I know how my camera works like the back of my hand, and didn't need to turn it on to know your example was backwards and nonsense.
It doesn't mean a difference in image brightness for that one shot. There is a difference in ergonomics and workflow when the needle is pointing to -1. In Av mode it means that every time you snap the shutter, the camera's going to adjust the shutter speed to make sure the image is 1 stop darker than the standard exposure calculation (based on your metering mode). The shutter speed changes every time, and you get consistent brightness across photos: always 1 stop darker than standard calculations.
By contrast, in M mode it means what you are CURRENTLY pointing at is 1 stop darker than the standard exposure calculation. But every time you release the shutter after that, the brightness will be different unless you keep shooting exactly the same subject in the same lighting. Recompose and you're no longer at -1. Wait until a cloud passes overhead, or the sun's position changes, and you're no longer at -1. Your settings in no way guarantee the brightness of your image, other than the one you're shooting immediately. That's probably why nobody calls this "exposure compensation"
Per my note above, I don't think anybody cares about 1938 terminology, even if you're right about it (so I am not going to bother asking for references).
I think most people are more interested in the OP's metering problem than the argument over philosophy and terminology. I'll say again that the OP's nonstandard terminology is a sign that he might not accurately describing his problem. And more importantly, lack of any info about metering mode means there is no way we can solve his problem.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum