Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Ideal exposure journey  (Read 3592 times)

wmchauncey

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 793
Ideal exposure journey
« on: October 27, 2013, 12:18:46 pm »

The was nothing in photography frustrated me more that getting ideal exposure...exposure compensation/metering was akin to a foreign language.

And then I discovered that my camera, a rather dated Canon 1Ds3, had live view and you could display a histogram within that live view...Dah. 
But wait a minute...that histogram did not agree with what I was seeing displayed in LR...another Dah
That Live View Histogram is based on the camera's jpeg rendition of that image which is influenced by your in-camera picture style settings.
Simply neutralize those settings by moving those setting's sliders to the left, problem solved, it now matches with LR.

Now it's a simple matter to ETTR by inputting two of the three settings, in manual mode, usually SS and F/stop, and pushing that histogram near the right edge by altering ISO.

This will not work though if your camera lacks the ability to display the histogram in Live View Mode.
Logged
The things you do for yourself die with

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10365
Re: Ideal exposure journey
« Reply #1 on: October 27, 2013, 09:47:45 pm »

Nikon, at least on the D800, has a dedicated autofocus button, or a button you can assign this function to. It deals only with focussing, and once pressed, it fixes the focussing on whatever part of the scene you want, or whatever part of the scene your single  focussing square covers. There's no need to keep your finger on the button (AF-On button, on the D800) as you move the camera for best composition.
The shutter button is then free to deal only with autoexposure and release of shutter. Such an arrangement allows you to select which part of the scene you want in sharp focus, or which part you think provides the best focal distance for maximum DoF, before devoting your attention to exposure.

With camera in manual mode, it then becomes straight forward to select which part of the scene you want to be given a full, ETTR exposure, by moving the focussing square over that part of the scene, say a cloud in the sky, whilst simultaneously half-depressing the shutter button and adjusting exposure with the wheel on the back of the camera as you look through the viewfinder, assuming you have the exposure indicator visible in the viewfinder, which indicates under/over or correct exposure.

Having fixed the desired exposure for the sky, such exposure does not change when you reposition the camera for the best composition, as long as you keep the shutter button half depressed.

However, whether or not the exposure indicator in the viewfinder is correct for an ETTR is another matter. I generally find that a modest overexposure, in accordance with the indicator, is required.

I notice there's a bit of confusion in that second last paragraph. If one is shooting in full manual mode then obviously there's no need to keep the shutter button half-depressed to maintain the manually adjusted exposure as one recomposes. It's in Aperture Priority mode where that feature is useful.
« Last Edit: October 28, 2013, 04:03:23 am by Ray »
Logged

stamper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5882
Re: Ideal exposure journey
« Reply #2 on: October 28, 2013, 04:53:57 am »

Ray you are advocating locking focus first and then dealing with exposure. From what I have read - and practised - it is usually the reverse. I would be interested to know if what you propose is "better" and if so why? Or is it one of you little idiosyncrasies.  ;)

stamper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5882
Re: Ideal exposure journey
« Reply #3 on: October 28, 2013, 05:10:30 am »

My preferred method of exposing in a landscape scene is to lock exposure on the brightest part of the sky outside of the sun and dial in + 2 EV. This brightens the shadow areas whilst still keeping detail in the sky. I know from experience that LR can safely recover 2 stops of detail in overexposed areas and possibly 3 stops. With this in mind last week I exposed some landscape scenes by exposing for a mid grey area - just as film photographers do - and see what I could recover in post processing. Areas that should have been blue were white - blown out - and I tried my best lowering Highlights and Whites to zero. Guess what? The blue in the sky was still blown probably because the blue channel had lost all of it's information. I shudder to think how practitioners of the mid grey exposure type of shooting cope with landscape scenes with high contrast. It is quite remarkable what LR can recover in the dark areas albeit at the risk of increasing noise. An example of what I'm stating.
« Last Edit: October 28, 2013, 05:20:06 am by stamper »
Logged

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10365
Re: Ideal exposure journey
« Reply #4 on: October 28, 2013, 09:58:04 am »

Ray you are advocating locking focus first and then dealing with exposure. From what I have read - and practised - it is usually the reverse. I would be interested to know if what you propose is "better" and if so why? Or is it one of you little idiosyncrasies.  ;)

Stamper,
The reason to lock focus first, assuming the subject is static, is because that's what grabs my attention; the main focus of interest. If it's a landscape with clouds in the sky, lighting conditions may change by the second, so better fix exposure the moment before releasing the shutter.
Logged

LKaven

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1060
Re: Ideal exposure journey
« Reply #5 on: October 28, 2013, 10:55:06 am »

I know from experience that LR can safely recover 2 stops of detail in overexposed areas and possibly 3 stops.

What Ray is describing sounds like using the AF-point selection to meter selectively.  It's a little like using a spot meter. 

His main point centers around setting in-camera controls to produce the most accurate histogram when judging ETTR exposure.  For example, on the Nikon, I leave my white balance at daylight, and set the "neutral" picture control, which yields a very good approximation to a linear mapping of the numbers coming off the sensor.

Make no mistake.  Lightroom will not "recover" anything, and it is only capable of remedying trivial overexposure.  If you are using a "standard" tone curve in your settings, then you are seeing the highlights boosted artificially.  In reality, there is about a stop or so of extra real headroom which the linear/neutral profile would reveal to you. 

In general, I think knowing what the real numbers are allows one to craft most effectively.

stamper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5882
Re: Ideal exposure journey
« Reply #6 on: October 28, 2013, 11:32:25 am »

Make no mistake.  Lightroom will not "recover" anything, and it is only capable of remedying trivial overexposure.  If you are using a "standard" tone curve in your settings, then you are seeing the highlights boosted artificially.  In reality, there is about a stop or so of extra real headroom which the linear/neutral profile would reveal to you.




Personally I have all settings as neutral/linear as possible and imo there isn't anything trivial about the recovery. I have recovered images that were over exposed - deliberately - by 3 stops which were satisfactory, at least to my eyes. This is of course a a personal thing just as Ray's methodology is personal, which I find odd, but it works for him.

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10365
Re: Ideal exposure journey
« Reply #7 on: October 28, 2013, 11:33:25 am »

When I was using Canon equipment I never found a way of locking auto focus in Aperture Priority mode without the need to keep my finger on a button.  Maybe  I just didn't read the manual carefully enough.

I also found that that exposure was related to focus point. As a consequence, I used to frequently bracket exposure to give me a better chance of getting an ETTR.

I'm not sure if the D800 is better in this respect, or if I'm just an ignorant bastard who couldn't be bothered to study the manual or ask questions on LL.  ;)
Logged

stamper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5882
Re: Ideal exposure journey
« Reply #8 on: October 28, 2013, 11:37:00 am »

Ray what you are describing is indeed a personal thing that works for you. More than one way of skinning a cat? :)

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10365
Re: Ideal exposure journey
« Reply #9 on: October 28, 2013, 12:00:31 pm »

Ray what you are describing is indeed a personal thing that works for you. More than one way of skinning a cat? :)

I'm not sure that's entirely true, Stamper. There are differences between Canon and Nikon, apart from megapixels and DR. Canon has far greater clarity in Liveview. I can't be bothered with Liveview on Nikon. It's just not sharp, so no point.

However, Nikon appears to have this useful exposure-independent autofocus facility, which I like, and the lack of which I found troublesome with my Canon equipment.
Logged

wmchauncey

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 793
Re: Ideal exposure journey
« Reply #10 on: October 28, 2013, 12:06:15 pm »

That LV function, for me, is used merely for exposure adjustment...once that is set, it's back to viewfinder for me.      ;)
Logged
The things you do for yourself die with

stamper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5882
Re: Ideal exposure journey
« Reply #11 on: October 28, 2013, 12:29:12 pm »

Ray I'm getting satisfactory results using LV on my Nikon d600 with manual focusing. I also use an LCD hood. According to what I have read the d600 uses contrast exposure instead of phase which is described as slower but more accurate.

http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d600/features04.htm

I have been very happy with the results. Consistently better than AF but drains the battery quicker.

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10365
Re: Ideal exposure journey
« Reply #12 on: October 28, 2013, 12:53:44 pm »

Stamper,
I used to marvel at the detail provided by a Canon 50D in LiveView mode with 400mm lens attached. With the Nikon, the LiveView image is just mushy by comparison. It's very difficult to get a better focus than autofocus provides.
« Last Edit: October 28, 2013, 11:06:29 pm by Ray »
Logged

Fine_Art

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1172
Re: Ideal exposure journey
« Reply #13 on: October 28, 2013, 01:18:10 pm »

Ray you are advocating locking focus first and then dealing with exposure. From what I have read - and practised - it is usually the reverse. I would be interested to know if what you propose is "better" and if so why? Or is it one of you little idiosyncrasies.  ;)

It makes perfect sense to me. Ray uses the AF which does not cover the whole frame. So he locks the AF, re-composes, lets the camera meter for that composition, then takes the shot? Perfectly logical. The only possible issue is focus field curvature after moving the shot.
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: Ideal exposure journey
« Reply #14 on: October 28, 2013, 04:49:13 pm »

Hi,

You don't need to recover two stops of overexposure in the highlights. Normal exposure is something like 2.5 - 3 stops under saturation, so recovery is not happening before overexposing by 2.5-3.0 EV.

The histograms in Lightroom are not true representation of raw data. To see raw data you need a tool like "RawDigger", that program is very useful in understanding raw data.

Best regards
Erik


My preferred method of exposing in a landscape scene is to lock exposure on the brightest part of the sky outside of the sun and dial in + 2 EV. This brightens the shadow areas whilst still keeping detail in the sky. I know from experience that LR can safely recover 2 stops of detail in overexposed areas and possibly 3 stops. With this in mind last week I exposed some landscape scenes by exposing for a mid grey area - just as film photographers do - and see what I could recover in post processing. Areas that should have been blue were white - blown out - and I tried my best lowering Highlights and Whites to zero. Guess what? The blue in the sky was still blown probably because the blue channel had lost all of it's information. I shudder to think how practitioners of the mid grey exposure type of shooting cope with landscape scenes with high contrast. It is quite remarkable what LR can recover in the dark areas albeit at the risk of increasing noise. An example of what I'm stating.
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 
Pages: [1]   Go Up