Blown highlights again-E510

I apologize... my description was "off"... I was referring to the bright white object in th center at the bottom... far and away the brightest object in your photo. Looks like a folded newspaper, or a white envelope or some such.
 
Did you check out the samples at the bottom of the posts?
Lots of clarity and detail, when the exposure is correct. I love tree detail!
--
Antara
http://antara.smugmug.com
 
Hi antara,

Try..
1.Changing metering mode from default 'ESP + AF ' to just 'ESP'
2.Switch to natural or maybe muted, anything but vivid mode.

3.Aim to preserve highlights rather than shadow in your exposure, there is always more shadow details that can recovered rather, but none from highlights if it's burned out.

4.Take a look at this thread .. http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1022&thread=24005577

Peace!
cj
--
Equipment in profile
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cjeng/
http://picasaweb.google.com/chuanren.ye/
 
Hi Antara;

Just to be sure.. I don't have E510 myself so can't comment it with personal experience.
Hi Tony,
Thanks for you considered reply.
I'm going to start a new post comparing the e510 and the g7 with an
outdoor contrasty scene. Even with all the settings on the e510
"fixed", low iso, low contrast, exp com at .7, the histogram on the
E510 shows practically no midtones and blown highlights and the
shadows are too bright. whereas on the g7, with just normal settings
and -.3, I get a great esposure for a difficult scene.
I was going to ask if it's exp -.7 not +.7 ... But now I have seen Exif of those images on smugmug and it definitely is -.7

IMHO, you coould try -1 or even -1.33 as there seem to be much quality on dark areas.. If it's too dark on computer just bring dark areas a up a bit (gamma or levels adjust)

What I have seen on older cameras there are plenty of situations (especially at wintertime with all snow) that +1 ain't enough to bring white back where it belongs (1.5 is about right).
Its easy to blame it on the photographer and I'm not saying I don't
need to make adjustments for difficult scenes. But why can't the
wonderful E510 manage as well as other cameras with certain contrasty
images. It has been assumed in alot of the answers here, that any
camera would have trouble, but that is not what I'm seeing.
As it is a new camera... I would not be countin out potential Firmware issue...

But.. Before it I'd recommend to check exposure meter accurancy by comparing it with other cameras on some easily exposured scenes.
 
Tan t-shirt... doesn't really surprise me.

Look at the "totality" of that image. Look across the top 1/3 of the whole frame. See how dark it is compared to the source light on the t-shirt? And look at the whole right 1/3 "vertically" in the frame, see how very dark and shadowed that area is "compared" to the source light on the t-shirt? I'll bet the tonal range of "what was there" exceeds 10 stops or better.

And w/ your camera set on P and the meter probably on esp, or center weighted, there's no way it can interpret that range, know what's most important, and expose for "it" with the camera just framing the scene as we see it. Impossible.

That was your job! No matter how brilliant a camera is, it cannot think and understand your "intentions" for the image.

I looks as though that is a scene that you may be able to replicate accurately.

If so, do so. And then set your ISO to 100 and your meter to spot meter, and the camera to A for aperture priority and the f stop to say 5.6. Now meter the t-shirt and write down the exposure the camera wants, then meter the darkest shadow somewhere in the left hand corner. Calculate the range of tones. I'll bet it is significant. Then ask yourself if you could ever expect any "in camera" meter to read and understand that? I don't want to offend you but I am assuming that your realize the shutter speed relationship? Each full increment in increased speed decreasing the light striking the film by 1/2? and that is is roughly linear? 1/6oth to 1/125th = 1 f stop? 1/125th to 1/250th another f/ stop? And so on. And vice versa? How many "stops" between the t-shirt and the deepest shadow?

Then, use the meter setting for the t-shirt and bracket that exposure in .3 stop increments until you have a range that runs from 1.6 stops "under" to 1.6 stops "over." CAREFULLY recording each one so that when you look at them you'll know exactly which is which. I guarantee you, you'll learn more about your camera / meter doing that than you could learn just going out and shooting 1,000 photos around town. In order to get that t-shirt to look properly "tan" I'll bet the exposure is pretty much right on. Tan is often somewhere near 18% reflectivity much as a grey card.

Believe it or not, you can actually get to the point where when you see a scene like this, and have the camera on esp, you'll know roughly how "off" it is going to read, press the ecomp button and dial in the correction, shoot.
 
I'm with you Antara.

I'm new to this camera and am startled by the amount of blown hilites (in my test pics). My gut feeling is the processor in the camera is not configured handle contrasty scenes well. I've crippled my camera settings and still can't get a head shot in oblque sunlight without half the face white or black.

My Canon p&s with digic2 processor handles contrast much better - no question.
I'm sorry if it irks the purists, but this is my opinion at this point in time.

I have a wedding coming up and am paranoid that I won't be able to photgraph the bride as it's outside at the beach. If I can't get them completely in the shade I'm gonna need a whole lot of fill light to boost the shadow side.

Hopefully I'll have a solution by then, but for now I'm not confident...
 
What strikes me odd in these forums is that essentially none of E-410 users seem to have similar highlight/exposure issues as these with E-510 .. Afterall those two have same Nmos-element, exposure metering hardware and TruePicIII asic for image processing ... About the only diffewrence woudl be different mainboard and sligltly altered Firmware in camera.

So is this just dues human (user) error or could it be that there is some hw/sw detail on 510 that causes difference.. IS it can't be, Liveview is the same ... ???

It would indeed be easy to say that these 510 owners are no-knowing noobs but why not 410?
I have the ability to take any camera and lens combination and blow
out highlights. It's really pretty easy to do.
There's a learning curve to any type of photography and part of that
curve is understanding exposure. There are many theories regarding
exposure and some prefer the "Expose to the Right" philosophy and
others, myself included, do not.
The key, IMO, is to learn your camera's capabilities and to work
within the alleged restraints of those capabilities.
My cameras do not "blow highlights" but using incorrect settings on
my camera may cause "blown highlights."

--
Troll Whisperer
Bill Turner

 
Hi Antara

Well I'm with you. I have an E510, having traded in my short-lived E500 for the allure of Image Stabilisation. I too have concerns over the E510's exposure certainly compared to the E500 and in particular in comparison to my trusty compact C70 and it's D40 predecessor.

I am really enjoying experimenting with the E510 but frankly feel I should have had a higher hit rate of acceptable shots from it than I have achieved thus far. In particular at an indoor birthday lunch a few weeks back, my feeling is that the indoor flash performance has yielded some staggeringly poor results that I do not think would have happened with the C70. Still experimenting, reading, thinking and listening but after a while you do ask yourself whether all is well with the camera. I think that's where you are too and i don't think you're alone.

How refreshing it is to find useful help and constructive suggestion on this forum from some members. How depressing to find sarcasm and dismissive cynicism from others. Perhaps the forum should be split into two sections, one for the "experts" who can enjoy being smug and superior in their own very darkroom, and one for the rest of us who are interested in the next picture being better than the current one.

Best of luck with the 510 - from the OM1 days to now, I have always had a belief in and respect for Olympus products and will persevere with the 510 which is certainly a joy to explore.

Kind regards

Edward
 
How refreshing it is to find useful help and constructive suggestion
on this forum from some members. How depressing to find sarcasm and
dismissive cynicism from others.
Best not to be too judgemental about this, it depends a lot on how the OP was interpreted. It's all too common to see "this camera is junk because..." style of rants when it's usually human error, and these understandably get rather negative replies.

In this case it seemed to me that although the camera was being blamed to some extent there was a reason for this wrong conclusion, namely that another camera appeared to not have the same problem.

Most importantly it wasn't in any way a "rant", so I decided it deserved a reasoned reply rather than a curt and dismissive "learn how to meter" response. Come to think about it that's actually pretty much what I did say, albeit not in a curt or dismissive manner ;-)

--
John Bean [BST/GMT+1] ('British Stupid Time')

PAW 2007 Week 29:
http://waterfoot.smugmug.com/gallery/2321711/2/175469318/Large



Index page: http://waterfoot.smugmug.com
Latest walkabout (21 March 2007):
http://waterfoot.smugmug.com/gallery/2641073
 
And without a doubt your responses are definitely in the helpful camp! Many thanks for that

Regards

Edward
 
. . . I don't even need to run these through photoshop histograms to tell that the Canon metered a darker exposure. It is visible. Look at the area under the tees up from, look at the tree in the top right, look athtesigns on the building in the shade. It is darker.

But look at the histogram also if you want proof . . there is a lot more data in the middle and high regions in the Olympus shot, while most of the data is scrunched in the lows in the Canon shot.

Better yet, look at the exif. This is the clear proof.

G7-

1/800
f/4
ISO 80

E510
1/125
f/7.1
ISO 100

The Canon G7 is metering about a one and a quarter to one and a half darker exposure. That is the difference between a blown out sky and a sky that is faintly blue like the Canon sky.

The shutter speed is 2 3/4 stops darker, the aperture is about 1 2/3 stops brighter, but the base ISO is about a half stop slower. This is just a case of need to learn how to use the cameras.

If we adjust the G7 to the same aperture and ISO we can see the difference in shutter speed.

adjsuted

G7 --

ISO 100 (1/3 stop, really about 40% a stop but we can fudge)

aperture f/7.1 (-1 2/3 stops . . .2/3 accounts for the bump in ISO and 1 1/3 to bring it to where the E510 was at)

To maitain the exposure value selected by the g7
Shutter speed should now be 1/320 sec now

SO

ISO 100
f/7.1
1/320

The E510 shot at 1/125!!! That is about 1 1/3 stops more light coming in!!

:-o

I could commend the G7 for protecting the highlights up top .. . but then it is easy because the camera probably defaults to flash mode anytime the lights go down.

The moral is this.

Every now and then photographers need to meter for themselves in some tricky situations. This involves a little knowledge of how metering works.

The first thing you need to know is that (without compensation) a light meter will always tell the camera to expose what you are pointing it at as a middle gray. Hence why photographers use gray cards from time to time, so they know what middle gray should be. But the problem with this is that you might not want something to be middle gray, even if it is. A good example of this would be protecting some really bright clouds in harsh cross lighting . . . you might want to meter a darker exposure than normal and push it up later in the (digital) darkroom.

Take the shot above. The camera has metered the middle area of the buildings to the middle point. This would be an issue if you want the sky, which is probably several stops brighter than what the camera is metering for, to be exposed. There are several ways around this. One you could dial in crazy EV comps when you are using matrix metering .. . knowing how far to go comes from experience and sometimes fine tuning an individual shot. The other way would be to meter the sky . . .maybe point the camera higher than it is to catch more sky, or to switch to spot metering and point directly at the sky, and then adjust exposure down about a half stop (because the clear blue sky should be a "little" brighter than a middle gray) and use the AEL button to make sure the camera doesn't change exposure when you recompose.

Remember the t-shirt shot? Well that was a shot that called for some spot metering and some knowledge of how it works. I would meter off the t-shirt . . .decide where you want it to fall in the "zones" and then adjust from there.

The other piece of advice I can give is to shoot in Manual mode in tricky situations where action isn't happening. It gives you more control over what is happening to shutter speed and aperture.

And as another poster had suggested . . . this isn't just about finding out about the E510 meter . . . but finding out about metering in general .. . which is almost as much intuition as it is science. :-)

Best of luck.

--
--
Comments are always welcome.

Zach Bellino

'Nothing, like something, happens anywhere.”
-- from 'I Remember, I Remember'
Philip Larkin (1922-1985)
 
Antara,

There are two sub modes for the ESP metering.. one is ESP + AF which will bias the metering to where the AF point is focusing on, and one is plain ESP which will evaluate the scene as a whole and not give emphasis to where the AF point is. I suggest changing the ESP from default which is +AF to just ESP should give you your desired results.

peace
cj
--
Equipment in profile
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cjeng/
http://picasaweb.google.com/chuanren.ye/
 
Its easy to blame it on the photographer and I'm not saying I don't
need to make adjustments for difficult scenes. But why can't the
wonderful E510 manage as well as other cameras with certain contrasty
images. It has been assumed in alot of the answers here, that any
camera would have trouble, but that is not what I'm seeing.
I won't believe that till I see your G7 shot of the same scene. There's just too many stops of light there. If you don't want to do two different exposures for blending, then you need to at least use 100 ISO and a tripod, spot meter on the highlights using your histogram and let the shadows fall where they may and try to bring them up in post processing. And whether you want to hear it or not, you will need to use Raw to get the best photo of this scene. (Unless you really think a jpeg from your digicam will do better)

It's OK if it's the photographers fault and not the camera. This is how we learn. But without comparison shots from both cameras, we really have no way of determing if it is the photographer or the camera. It is no concidence that many experienced photographers are veiwing your photo and know immediately there are more stops of light there then any camera can record properly in one exposure.
I hope I don't sound rude. just trying to help.
 
I found this whole discussion interesting. As a new owner of the 510 in addition to the 500, I have run into this situation many times. My switch to digital SLRs came with an E-20. I learned then and have continued with the 500 and 510 to meter for the "highlights" as has been suggest here, before I knew that what I was doing.

My process is, if I think the highlights are going to be blown out, is to meter for the highlights, take the picture, then take another one with my final composition. That way I have two shots of the picture, one with highlights, one without. Photoshop is a wonderful thing.

Works for me...

bottom line is you must know the limitations of the cam... and adjust for them. You are the one taking the picture, the cam is just a device.
--
Keep taking em' You can only get better

JC
 
You do like to be argumentative, Dan.

Actually, I took phots all afternoon of this view and consistently got the same overexposure problem when I focused in the middle on the wall, esp, cw, didn't matter.
So there! (-:
--
Antara
http://antara.smugmug.com
 
Good to hear from you, a lone voice in a sea of "experts."
I have learned tho to really use the skills talked of here, a good reminder.

The whole point of this was to say that the camera doesn't meter correctly is certain situations. Of course there are work arounds and you have to learn the idiosyncrasies of your camera.

But this overexposure reading and the weird blue WB in shade sometimes needs to be addressed,
Thanks for your support.
--
Antara
http://antara.smugmug.com
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top