650D metering mode problem?

[letsgofishing]

WilbaW wrote:

letsgofishing wrote:

WilbaW wrote:

The histogram shows that the meter did exactly what it's supposed to do. Congratulations, you have a perfectly functioning camera.

If you want the image darker or lighter than the meter gives you, it's up to you to make that happen. It can't read your mind. Your raw data is fine, and you were able to get the image you wanted from it, so the only problem is that you expected the camera to do something different.

Sorry, I don't believe you're right. The live view of the scene was MUCH lighter than the actual scene - why was this?

Because the meter's job is to make every scene standard bright, with a normal tonal range between black and white. That's what Live View showed you, and that's what you see in the image. It performed faultlessly.

Give the meter a scene darkly and brightly lit and it will make both images look as bright. Try this for yourself - shoot the same scene in daylight and twilight, or lights on and lights off. Unless you hit a limit, like run out of ISO, you'll get the same image brightness. That's the meter doing its job for you.

You can see what the meter did from the histogram for the first JPEG - it's nicely "in the middle", not bunched up at either end. Whereas the histogram for the processed shot is well to the left. You have to tell the camera that you want the histogram pushed to the left if you want it to give you that dark look.

Yes, I could have underexposed by 2-3 stops and then would have got an "actual" result, but why would this be necessary if the metering was supposed to be right iin the first place?

It's because you think the meter can know what your idea of "right" is, that it should know that you don't want a standard, normal, average, everyday, 18% grey, 50% reflective image brightness. It can't read your mind, you have to tell it what you want.

You just have to accept that the meter is simply giving you a piece of information (a standardised guess of how much light is hitting the scene), and it's your job, not the meter's, to make creative decisions based on that information.

The great thing with digital is that you don't have to rely on the meter and your experience. You just take a test shot and review the histogram, or view the live histogram in Live View, and you know exactly what's going on.

Great - I understand what you're saying - thanks, but you are also saying that the evaluative metering on the camera does not represent the scene as it is in reality? It will average any scene to 18% grey no matter what the actual liighting conditions are?

Try the exposure compensation controls in Tv, Av, and P to see how the image brightness and histogram changes with the meter display. Try the same control actions in M mode to see how that's fundamentally the same thing.

Did you do that? What did you see?

As you over or underexpose the scene, it gets darker or lighter, which is what I would expect ?

 

[letsgofishing]

10s wrote:

letsgofishing wrote:

10s wrote:

As far as I know, Canon's DPP honors the ALO setting in your camera (also the HTP setting btw). Might be that Lightroom also catched up with the Canon meta data for HTP and ALO. If in your case ALO is switched on that might explain the extra boost in the shadows. Just switch it off in DPP and your shadow curve is like you are used to from the older Rebels.

I used ACR to process the image and ALO was set to off.

Well, that being clear I think you got used a bit too much to center weighed metering The evaluative approach tries to guess the scene and indeed might guess exposure differently than you expect. With this particular image I prefer the way the camera caught as much light as possible without clipping the highlights; perfect for post processing since its the best way to get an optimal signal/noise ratio. If you're in for more predictability, switch on the center weighed metering. Try live view for a while, especially with landscapes - no more surprises then with the exposure.

Have fun with your new camera, I also use a T4i. It has much to offer (and learn).

Thanks for the reply. I was using lLV which threw me even more!

 

[letsgofishing]

"It's because you think the meter can know what your idea of "right" is, that it should know that you don't want a standard, normal, average, everyday, 18% grey, 50% reflective image brightness. It can't read your mind, you have to tell it what you want."

Surely if this is the case, then if I photograph a white, a grey and a black piece of card, then the metering should reproduce them as all the same grey value?? i.e. it will "average out" the light in the scene?

Apologies if I'm being a PITA....

 

[MAC]

brightcolours wrote:
Every camera does different guess work at what might the the best exposure depending on the scene, and you have to learn your camera's tricks and trades.

I like the ETTR (Exposure to the Right) behavior in RAW.

As F. Miranda pointed out in his review of the 5d3 Canon vs the D800, ETTR is the way that Canon cameras can compensate for having less dynamic range than the Nikon. Just use the added RAW headroom and avoid the black shadows using ETTR and bringing back the exposure curve in post for less noise, less banding, more dynamic range with ETTR.

congrats Canon for lightening it up in first brush interpretation. In the end, it is up to us to take control with first digital principles - digital does better to the right.

 

[photonius]

letsgofishing wrote:

Just got my 650D - was shooting a moonrise on the beach and the resulting RAW files are incredibly "light" - they are not overexposed so that the whites are blown, but it looks like the entire scene was lit up with movie lights! It was so dark that I couldn't make out the buttons on the camera....

I was using the "evaluative" mode which the manual says is a "general purpose mode suited for even backlit subjects".

Guess I should have used spot metering and taken a reading on an area of sky away from the moon and then locked the exposure?

I attach a jpg from the original untouched RAW file as well as a jpg of what the scene looked like (more or less) to the eye.

apart from all the discussion on metering, what you have here is just right. if the first image is not overexposed, then all is fine, you are using the dynamic range of your sensor optimally ("expose to the right" as mentioned). to get the dark feeling, just reduce brightness later in the computer as you did.













--
*** Life is short, time to zoom in *** ©

 

[R2D2]

letsgofishing wrote:

In addition your camera has a function called Live View. A feature almost Custom Built for shooting scenics, as the image on the LCD will reflect whatever settings you select on the camera. Give this method a whirl next time you're out. You'll become a very Happy Camper, guaranteed.

I was using live view and that's what threw me - what it showed was nowhere neaar the actual the actual lighting of the scene!

That's because "the image on the LCD will reflect whatever settings you select on the camera."

Which in this case was the Evaluative Metering setting. And thus the camera will "think" that a dark object in the center of the frame is your backlit subject (ie a person), and will increase the exposure accordingly.

Avoid this camera "guesswork" by not using Evaluative Metering, EVER.

You'll be a stronger (and happier) photographer for it!

R2

 

[MAC]

R2D2 wrote:

letsgofishing wrote:

In addition your camera has a function called Live View. A feature almost Custom Built for shooting scenics, as the image on the LCD will reflect whatever settings you select on the camera. Give this method a whirl next time you're out. You'll become a very Happy Camper, guaranteed.

I was using live view and that's what threw me - what it showed was nowhere neaar the actual the actual lighting of the scene!

That's because "the image on the LCD will reflect whatever settings you select on the camera."

Which in this case was the Evaluative Metering setting. And thus the camera will "think" that a dark object in the center of the frame is your backlit subject (ie a person), and will increase the exposure accordingly.

Avoid this camera "guesswork" by not using Evaluative Metering, EVER.

You'll be a stronger (and happier) photographer for it!

R2

I like what evaluative did here - look at the bright side - ETTR to increase dynamic range and decrease noise and banding. In post, a better photo.

but hey, I've been ETTR'ing for the last 5 years :-D

 

[iancrowe]

letsgofishing wrote:

"It's because you think the meter can know what your idea of "right" is, that it should know that you don't want a standard, normal, average, everyday, 18% grey, 50% reflective image brightness. It can't read your mind, you have to tell it what you want."

Surely if this is the case, then if I photograph a white, a grey and a black piece of card, then the metering should reproduce them as all the same grey value?? i.e. it will "average out" the light in the scene?

Apologies if I'm being a PITA....

Absolutely correct.

In best Blue Peter mode here are some I prepared earlier.

All were shot in diffuse daylight Av mode and evaluative metering with no exposure compensation, ISO 100 @ f/5.6. Note the variation in shutter speed the camera chooses for each image.



All targets.


Black sweatshirt.


White T-shirt


18% grey card.




Ian

 

[BAK]

The fact you had some other camera before does not seem to magically remove operator error from your current efforts.

BAK

 

[BAK]

You ask why live view was bright.

It did it because that's what meters do.

And it's a problem because you do not understand the principles of using a meter / measuring light / how a camera determines exposure / why God invented the grey card.

Simple as that.

ETTR has nothing do do with anything, by the way.

Go photograph a white wedding dress and go photograph a black tuxedo. Fill the frame. See what happens.

Then go to a big book store.

BAK

 

[R2D2]

MAC wrote:

I like what evaluative did here - look at the bright side - ETTR to increase dynamic range and decrease noise and banding. In post, a better photo.

Right. Exactly what I wrote in my first post.

However Evaluative metering is just too inconsistent for my liking. Consistency and Predictability are what give Pros their edge. I shoot in Manual mode (using center-weighted metering) 99% of the time, and can thus give the image any appearance I desire. The OP could do the same if he wants.

R2

 

[R2D2]

iancrowe wrote:

letsgofishing wrote:

"It's because you think the meter can know what your idea of "right" is, that it should know that you don't want a standard, normal, average, everyday, 18% grey, 50% reflective image brightness. It can't read your mind, you have to tell it what you want."

Surely if this is the case, then if I photograph a white, a grey and a black piece of card, then the metering should reproduce them as all the same grey value?? i.e. it will "average out" the light in the scene?

Apologies if I'm being a PITA....

Absolutely correct.

In best Blue Peter mode here are some I prepared earlier.

All were shot in diffuse daylight Av mode and evaluative metering with no exposure compensation, ISO 100 @ f/5.6. Note the variation in shutter speed the camera chooses for each image.


All targets.


Black sweatshirt.


White T-shirt


18% grey card.

Ian

Bingo Ian.

R2




--
Good judgment comes from experience.
Experience comes from bad judgment.

Galleries by Jekyll & Hyde

www.pbase.com

 

[MAC]

R2D2 wrote:

MAC wrote:

I like what evaluative did here - look at the bright side - ETTR to increase dynamic range and decrease noise and banding. In post, a better photo.

Right. Exactly what I wrote in my first post.

However Evaluative metering is just too inconsistent for my liking. Consistency and Predictability are what give Pros their edge. I shoot in Manual mode (using center-weighted metering) 99% of the time, and can thus give the image any appearance I desire. The OP could do the same if he wants.

R2

i use to use center weighted for people shots, but my 5dc sucked at it,so I moved to my back button method to separate focus from metering and started metering using spot metering on the face. What I found when I upgraded my 40d to my 60d and t4i - is that the 63 zone dual layer metering of evaluative was so much better than the old cameras, particularly when the light was changing. So I haven't found a desire to start with spot metering yet on the new cameras,

that said, as you said, cameras are dumb. With LV on the new cameras, the way you meter should just be a starting point, then adjust to taste. So far, I've been using evaluative as the starting point and have been pleased with it giving me ETTR like in this photo

 

[R2D2]

letsgofishing wrote:

you are also saying that the evaluative metering on the camera does not represent the scene as it is in reality?

Exactly. It tries harder, but it can't.

It will average any scene to 18% grey no matter what the actual liighting conditions are?

Nope. Evaluative metering often results in exposures that can be far from that.

In fact the T4i throws another wrench into things by using what Canon calls its 63-zone iFCL (intelligent Focus, Color, Luminance) metering system, which takes focus, color, illumination, and data from all 9 AF points into account when determining exposure.

NOW try to guess how the camera is going to expose your scene. Yikes.

Fortunately there are still the other metering modes (spot, partial, & center-weighted), where your exposure meter will turn whatever fills the metering area into 18% grey. Combine that fact with the samples that Ian posted and you are well on your way.

Happy shooting,

R2

ps. Don't worry, we aren't tiring of this discussion . This is what we LIVE FOR!!!

 

[R2D2]

MAC wrote:

i use to use center weighted for people shots, but my 5dc sucked at it,so I moved to my back button method to separate focus from metering and started metering using spot metering on the face. What I found when I upgraded my 40d to my 60d and t4i - is that the 63 zone dual layer metering of evaluative was so much better than the old cameras, particularly when the light was changing. So I haven't found a desire to start with spot metering yet on the new cameras,

that said, as you said, cameras are dumb. With LV on the new cameras, the way you meter should just be a starting point, then adjust to taste. So far, I've been using evaluative as the starting point and have been pleased with it giving me ETTR like in this photo

Funny you mention this, because I've been debating starting a thread discussing the importance (or un-importance) of metering nowadays, what with the advent of the Histogram, Blinkies, HTP, iFCL metering (as you point out), Live View, instant image review, etc etc. In fact since I shoot in Manual mode, I hardly ever look at the exposure meter any more, except for maybe initially, and when the lighting changes drastically.

'Course I've been doing this a loooong time and much of it is going by pure instinct at this point. However IMHO those new to photography should still start by understanding the basics of exposure, and then build from there using the great tools now available on these "micro-computers"... errr cameras.

R2

 

[ProtoPhoto]

R2D2 wrote:

letsgofishing wrote:

I was using live view and that's what threw me - what it showed was nowhere neaar the actual the actual lighting of the scene!

It should have shown you exactly. It helps to have the histogram displayed before you shoot as well, otherwise the apparent brightness of your shot can vary with the ambient lighting around you as view the screen.

For important shots, as in a moon rising over a beach, don't expect anything but you to get it "right" on the first try, it is often an iterative process. Your choice of metering mode and exposure compensation are only the first step, you then review the results and try again. Another option is making a habit of exposure bracketing for such shots.

That's because "the image on the LCD will reflect whatever settings you select on the camera."

Which in this case was the Evaluative Metering setting. And thus the camera will "think" that a dark object in the center of the frame is your backlit subject (ie a person), and will increase the exposure accordingly.

Avoid this camera "guesswork" by not using Evaluative Metering, EVER.

With my XSi / 450D, I used primarily center-weighted and never evalautive metering, at least not after the first week or so.

Technology changes. Wtih my T3i / 600D I prefer evaluative as my STARTING POINT rather than center weighted. Which I may adjust using Live View and EC before taking the shot, using the histogram as well. Which I may then adjust again afterwards, in an iterative process.

The question is what metering mode is the better setting for a shorter process, not letting the camera make the decisions for me. Anytime I come back from shooting and I don't like the exposures, the fault is mine for not taking better control of the tool and process, not the camera's fault. Metering mode is just a setting on a tool.

 

[WilbaW]

letsgofishing wrote:

you are also saying that the evaluative metering on the camera does not represent the scene as it is in reality?

I would say it does work with the reality of the scene, rather than your perception of it. Someone decided a long time ago that it would be useful to assume that a typical scene reflects 18% of the light falling on it (actually 12%... but let's keep it simple for the sake of the story). The meter works backwards from that - if I am seeing X% of the light hitting the scene, then the total is probably 100/X of that. And if the scene were receiving that guess of total illumination, then these combinations of aperture, shutter, and ISO should give a normal-looking image. The meter has no idea that you want the image to look dark and moody rather than like midday on a sunny day.

It will average any scene to 18% grey no matter what the actual liighting conditions are?

Pretty much. It will try to give you a histogram like you got. Different modes do various fancy things to try to get it "right" for people who don't want to take that responsibility, but if you want your idea of right you have to impose that.

For your shot, shooting JPEG, you'd have to negatively compensate the metering. (You know you had +1/3 on that shot? So you were telling it to make the image brighter than normal.) -2 would have given you f/11 at ISO 800, or f/5 at ISO 160, or any compatible combination in between.

For raw, you accidentally did a nice ETTR and got good data, and you were easily able to pull it down on the computer to get the image you wanted. Lovely.

As you over or underexpose the scene, it gets darker or lighter, which is what I would expect ?

Yep, so now you know how to take control and get what you want.

 

[WilbaW]

letsgofishing wrote:
if I photograph a white, a grey and a black piece of card, then the metering should reproduce them as all the same grey value?? i.e. it will "average out" the light in the scene?

You should never ask that kind of question!

Here's what that means...

In the time it took you to put that question into words and post them, you could have done the experiment. In those cases, don't ask, just do the experiment. You're going to understand and remember the answer much better from your own hand-on experience than what a bunch of nerks on the 'net said, and you'll develop skill and courage through doing it. Just do it!

 

[ARShutterbug]

It looks like the camera guessed what you were pointing at, and got the correct exposure. What's the problem? If you submitted the "what it looked like to me" example to me, it would be rejected as improperly processed. The camera correctly exposed the scene for you, and you should try to match what it did as you develop your own technique.

 

[ARShutterbug]

It's called Exposure Simulation. Check your manual!