most cameras these days feature sophisticated multi point reading sensors for establishing the light falling at various positions on the sensor, these readings are then subjected to a complicated algorithm to establish the correct exposure. So often, we then have to apply exposure correction to get things right. Does this mean multi point exposure readings are a waste of time and, if we need to apply an input, we would be better off taking a basic reading and, using our past experience, decide on the correct exposure for the particular scene?
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Exposure
- Thread starter Gandolphi
- Start date
gollywop
Veteran Member
If you're shooting raw, try ETTR and forget the meter.
If you're shooting JPEG, it can't help you as much, but it can a little under certain cicumstances.
See ETTR Exposed.
--
gollywop
http://g4.img-dpreview.com/D8A95C7DB3724EC094214B212FB1F2AF.jpg
If you're shooting JPEG, it can't help you as much, but it can a little under certain cicumstances.
See ETTR Exposed.
--
gollywop
http://g4.img-dpreview.com/D8A95C7DB3724EC094214B212FB1F2AF.jpg
Last edited:
Exactly. Why spend time and money improving metering systems and then employing mathematicians to write algorithms when everyone's correct exposure will be different. A basic metering system, as used by Leica M series cameras, added to common sense and experience, does an equally good job.
AdriaanMeijer
Senior Member
If you make the photo's that millions made before you the algorithms may work. But how can the computer (the small one inside the camera) know what I want??
It's like the autocomposition option. When ON you only need to propell the camera above your head and when there's a good composition and interesting people smiling it will click.
It's like the autocomposition option. When ON you only need to propell the camera above your head and when there's a good composition and interesting people smiling it will click.
My opinion is today DSLR metering algorithm is incredibly good and should be taken advantage of. However, it will not be as smart as you are in some cases and can be fooled rather easily...
What I will usually do is to take a quick look at what the camera thinks is correct exposure and use that info as a basis then I would modify the settings to my liking (in Manual mode). Recently, I've discovered that you can use Live View Mode to great effect. I shoot Canon and it's live view has an option to enable exposure simulation. I can tinker with the 3 exposure settings in M mode and view what I will get instantly on the screen...great tool for landscapes and even portrait work. Today camera's battery is so good, I have yet run out of battery even after using live view and instant reviews all the time. (my spare batteries must be feeling very lonely)
What I will usually do is to take a quick look at what the camera thinks is correct exposure and use that info as a basis then I would modify the settings to my liking (in Manual mode). Recently, I've discovered that you can use Live View Mode to great effect. I shoot Canon and it's live view has an option to enable exposure simulation. I can tinker with the 3 exposure settings in M mode and view what I will get instantly on the screen...great tool for landscapes and even portrait work. Today camera's battery is so good, I have yet run out of battery even after using live view and instant reviews all the time. (my spare batteries must be feeling very lonely)
Art Jacks
Senior Member
My Gossen Mastersix meter from the dark ages had a primitive form of histogram, a general reading could be locked in then moving the meter around it would indicate how many stops above the highlights were and how many stops below the shadows were, there is also an attachment that gives two additional narrower angles of meter readings, bit like spot reading. I am sure the more modern versions have a more sophisticated display.
Yes, knowing your metering system is the key...
Actually I'm one of those being highly impressed by what we are offered today. Most times it's spot on, but shooting high contrast or very low contrast scenes "she" is a little insecure and don't agree with my love of highly blown areas... didn't take long before going to full manual settings and use meter purely as a basic guide.
"To know her is to love her"! :-D
gollywop
Veteran Member
bosjohn21
Forum Pro
in the real world it probably does not matter how many points are sampled as after more than four or five give or take the change in over all exposure is becoming imperceptible. It is still an averaging reading and in the end should be very little different than the old fashioned averaging meter which favored the center or some such.
for any of a number of neophyte shooters who ask my advice and let me say up front I am not a teacher of photography, I recommend taking your digital camera off auto and set it to full manual if possible, and turn off or ignore any meter settings besides ISO and go shoot using the sunny sixteen rule or some other not metering paradigm for eyeballing exposure. Once you have realized that for the vast majority of situations you really do not even need a meter you will also know when your meter is not giving you the exposure that is needed for the scene in front of you.
In this modern day and age we depend more and more on devices like built in metering and never understand that the meter is only an aid.
also understanding what the meter is actually measuring is good to know and will help you know when your meter is not telling you the exposure that is best for the image.
most if not all meters are set to measure the light falling on it as though it were what is commonly referred to as eighteen percent gray. Simply this means if you shot a pure white wall using the meter in your camera the wall will be gray. if you shoot a black wall with your camera using the meter is will be the same gray.
which in the real world means you must be aware of what in your image the meter is measuring.
for any of a number of neophyte shooters who ask my advice and let me say up front I am not a teacher of photography, I recommend taking your digital camera off auto and set it to full manual if possible, and turn off or ignore any meter settings besides ISO and go shoot using the sunny sixteen rule or some other not metering paradigm for eyeballing exposure. Once you have realized that for the vast majority of situations you really do not even need a meter you will also know when your meter is not giving you the exposure that is needed for the scene in front of you.
In this modern day and age we depend more and more on devices like built in metering and never understand that the meter is only an aid.
also understanding what the meter is actually measuring is good to know and will help you know when your meter is not telling you the exposure that is best for the image.
most if not all meters are set to measure the light falling on it as though it were what is commonly referred to as eighteen percent gray. Simply this means if you shot a pure white wall using the meter in your camera the wall will be gray. if you shoot a black wall with your camera using the meter is will be the same gray.
which in the real world means you must be aware of what in your image the meter is measuring.
PhotoTeach2
Forum Pro
Most "mirrorless" cameras have live histograms before exposure.
Most also have "zebras" so you literally can see every pixel and can adjust EC where highlights are at saturation level you want. (ETTR)
All before the exposure.
This data is directly off the image sensor so can be more accurate than a separate sensor you have to "trust" to be accurate. With
After exposure, most mirrorless have "blinkies" which again indicate saturated pixels.
Most also have "zebras" so you literally can see every pixel and can adjust EC where highlights are at saturation level you want. (ETTR)
All before the exposure.
This data is directly off the image sensor so can be more accurate than a separate sensor you have to "trust" to be accurate. With
After exposure, most mirrorless have "blinkies" which again indicate saturated pixels.
BertIverson
Senior Member
I shoot RAW and usually use matrix/average metering. I make a judgement on each shot:
(1) If there are extreme highlights that I deem to be important, I dial in -1EV
(2) If there are important shadows, I dial in +1EV
NB -- #1 way more often than #2
Works for my camera and my personality -- YMMV
Bert
(1) If there are extreme highlights that I deem to be important, I dial in -1EV
(2) If there are important shadows, I dial in +1EV
NB -- #1 way more often than #2
Works for my camera and my personality -- YMMV
Bert
The histogram and "blinkies" displayed by mirrorless cameras are not derived directly off the image sensor. They are derived from the output of the camera's JPEG processing software and as such do not do a good job of accurately displaying the sensor exposure.
D
digidog
Guest
No but close. ETTR (which is an old and kind of silly term) is really optimal exposure for raw. You can't shoot a JPEG and a raw at the same time and have ideal exposure for both! The data is vastly different.
In raw, expose for the highlights (don't blow out data you wish to retain) and develop for the highlights; normalize the raw and the net result is better data (less noise for one).
Ideal exposure for raw will blow out the highlights in most cases with the JPEG.
You'd think. We need a raw histogram! Now you can get one after the capture; get a copy of RawDigger! The camera histogram is nearly useless for the capture of raw data; it's designed for the JPEG.
gollywop is spot on!
Histograms are often a big fat lie:
Everything you thought you wanted to know about Histograms
Another exhaustive 40 minute video examining:
What are histograms. In Photoshop, ACR, Lightroom.
Histograms: clipping color and tones, color spaces and color gamut.
Histogram and Photoshop’s Level’s command.
Histograms don’t tell us our images are good (examples).
Misconceptions about histograms. How they lie.
Histograms and Expose To The Right (ETTR).
Are histograms useful and if so, how?
Low rez (YouTube):
High rez: http://digitaldog.net/files/Histogram_Video.mov
--
Andrew Rodney
Author: Color Management for Photographers
The Digital Dog
http://www.digitaldog.net
Last edited:
PhotoTeach2
Forum Pro
And why would it not do an excellent job if your output is going to be JPEG anyway ???
IF you are working in RAW, you could set your zebra to 110%+ or higher and thus allow your JPEG's to blow with the confidence you can still recover in RAW.
It still provides a more-accurate way than relying on the cameras "guesses" from separate sensors that can't identify specific (small) areas.
The direct visual feedback when making exposure/WB/focus is a much faster and more accurate method that virtually eliminates the need for bracketing, (albeit sometimes I do that also).
The direct visual feedback also makes (for beginners) LEARNING exposure/WB much easier/faster.
Last edited:
D
digidog
Guest
Is it based on the raw data or a JPEG? BIG difference.
Smaug01
Veteran Member
I use matrix metering almost all of the time, and it works really well, in all of my cameras.
The rare times it doesn't work well, I can usually just bump up the exposure manually for that shot. For those ultra-rare times when that isn't practical, I just switch to spot-metering.
Some people just leave it on spot metering and meter from the area of the frame they are most concerned with by using the AEL button. But that slows down shooting, so isn't practical for candid or action shooting.
The rare times it doesn't work well, I can usually just bump up the exposure manually for that shot. For those ultra-rare times when that isn't practical, I just switch to spot-metering.
Some people just leave it on spot metering and meter from the area of the frame they are most concerned with by using the AEL button. But that slows down shooting, so isn't practical for candid or action shooting.
PhotoTeach2
Forum Pro
I don't argue that any meter mode works well most of the time. But "how" optimized is it we never know unless we view the histogram after exposure, (assuming you can see it in sunlight). But even the histogram does not get down to (individual) "pixel" level very well, (compared to the fact you can "see" the entire image and specific parts that may be blown/saturated).
With "zebras", you can be confident you are as highly-exposed as possible with a known amount of saturation.
But unless your "concerned" spot is an accurate 18%-gray reflection, you still should use EC for correction, and it is still just an "educated" guess how much correction to make.
AND it there are (bright) highlights, there is still no guarantee they won't blow, (without you knowing it).
With "zebras" you can still do the exact same, (spot-metering), BUT with the added information that you have saturation.
You can then make your choice to correct or accept a (known) amount of saturation.
Last edited:
gollywop
Veteran Member
This is true
But this need not be.
While the JPEG-derived histograms may not fully represent the underlying raw data, a complete representation is unnecessary for ETTR. The only thing that is important for ETTR is that the top edge of the camera's histogram, or the onset of the blinkies, represent the maximal raw values (the top edge of the raw histogram).
For most cameras it is possible to establish camera settings (WB, saturation, contrast, sharpness, picture mode, color space) that allow the top of the camera's LV histogram (or the onset of the blinkies) to denote quite faithfully the top of the raw histogram. I find the LV blinkies to be best suited for this purpose but have both LV histogram and blinkies displayed simultaneously.
Unfortunately, many people find the requisite camera settings to result in LCD (EVF) images that are not to usual tastes. This is particularly true if one uses UniWB, which is very beneficial in this regard, but is also accompanied by a greenish cast.
I personally find this of no practical significance since, when shooting raw, all processing is done later on the computer, and a (seemingly) accurate LCD image is of no real value other than to confirm a proper composition. Clearly, if one is shooting JPEG, this issue is of greater consequence. However, ETTR is really for raw since, as digidog correctly points out, a proper exposure for raw is rarely the same as that for JPEG.
For those who are interested in more on establishing the Best Camera Settings for ETTR, you may consult the section of that title in ETTR Exposed.
--
gollywop
http://g4.img-dpreview.com/D8A95C7DB3724EC094214B212FB1F2AF.jpg
Last edited:
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum