| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/16/2007 02:06:04 PM · #1 |
| I was once told that if I take a picture that's overexposed, and then reduce exposure until there are no more overblown pixels in the subject, then that's the correct exposure. Is that correct? |
|
|
|
08/16/2007 02:09:19 PM · #2 |
| The correct exposure is the point where the picture looks the way you want it to. |
|
|
|
08/16/2007 02:12:09 PM · #3 |
| some may disagree, but for me, the best exposure using digital equipment is one that has as much of the information to the right side of the histogram as possible without any highlight clipping (extending beyond the right side of the histogram). So i think you have it right. |
|
|
|
08/16/2007 02:12:34 PM · #4 |
You might find THIS ARTICLE helpful.
There are a lot of elements to exposure, and you can't apply a single idea to a broad spectrum of situations.
|
|
|
|
08/16/2007 02:15:14 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
The correct exposure is the point where the picture looks the way you want it to. |
I would disagree...the exposure is different from the final result. An improperly exposed digital file may look OK, but may not have as much information as it could. Most of the information is in the right side of the histogram. An image that doesn't take advantage of that fact will not have as much info as one that does take advantage of it. |
|
|
|
08/16/2007 02:16:50 PM · #6 |
That would work if the dynamic range of the photo isn't too great. If the dynamic range of your photo excedes your sensor, doing this will save your hilites and lose your shadows. Sometimes you have to choose if you want to expose for the hilites or the shadows or something in between.
Or you could do HDR (see bear_music) |
|
|
|
08/16/2007 02:18:33 PM · #7 |
It's also not against the law to have blown highlights :)
|
|
|
|
08/16/2007 02:19:42 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by jemison:
some may disagree, but for me, the best exposure using digital equipment is one that has as much of the information to the right side of the histogram as possible without any highlight clipping (extending beyond the right side of the histogram). So i think you have it right. |
And there ya have it. That's pretty much my philosophy too. Ofcourse if I'm shooting a white background I want clipping as much as possible on that.
|
|
|
|
08/16/2007 02:21:17 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by tivo:
I was once told that if I take a picture that's overexposed, and then reduce exposure until there are no more overblown pixels in the subject, then that's the correct exposure. Is that correct? |
Wow, thanks for the quick responses. As I said in my question, as long as my "subject" has no overblown highlights, then I'm ok? For example I may not care if the background is a little overexposed as long as I get as much detail as possible in my subject. Am I correct? |
|
|
|
08/16/2007 02:25:50 PM · #10 |
| Yeah as long as the overexposed background doesn't pull the eye from the subject. Remember your eye is attracted by the brightest spots in a scene. |
|
|
|
08/31/2007 08:23:52 PM · #11 |
| I was obsessed with the histogram when I first got my D50. I would reshoot the picture until I got the histogram "just right". Now I just take the picture and expose it the way I want it to look. I find that it all depends on the subject and personal taste. |
|
|
|
08/31/2007 08:28:26 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
It's also not against the law to have blown highlights :) |
No, but it's considered blasphemy at DPC. In the challenges, anyways. |
|
|
|
08/31/2007 09:03:36 PM · #13 |
|
|
|
08/31/2007 10:32:05 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by jemison:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
The correct exposure is the point where the picture looks the way you want it to. |
I would disagree...the exposure is different from the final result. An improperly exposed digital file may look OK, but may not have as much information as it could. Most of the information is in the right side of the histogram. An image that doesn't take advantage of that fact will not have as much info as one that does take advantage of it. |
Said differently, the correct exposure is that which gives you the result you want.
Message edited by author 2007-08-31 22:32:49. |
|
|
|
08/31/2007 11:25:52 PM · #15 |
For film, expose for the shadows, print for the highlights.
For digital, expose for the highlights, print for the shadows. You can't recover lost data once you blow those highlights but you can always brighten them up if they are a little underexposed. |
|
|
|
08/31/2007 11:33:25 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
It's also not against the law to have blown highlights :) |
Thank You John.
I couldn't agree more, and in some cases, is what makes a shot work such as this, a shot I cannot find any way to improve it,
and remains to this day, one of my favorites. Exposed correctly? I'd say yes.
 |
|
|
|
08/31/2007 11:36:13 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by jemison:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
The correct exposure is the point where the picture looks the way you want it to. |
I would disagree...the exposure is different from the final result. An improperly exposed digital file may look OK, but may not have as much information as it could. Most of the information is in the right side of the histogram. An image that doesn't take advantage of that fact will not have as much info as one that does take advantage of it. |
Said differently, the correct exposure is that which gives you the result you want. |
said differently still, getting the result you want may have nothing to do with getting the exposure correct.
|
|
|
|
08/31/2007 11:48:34 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by Brad:
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
It's also not against the law to have blown highlights :) |
Thank You John.
I couldn't agree more, and in some cases, is what makes a shot work such as this, a shot I cannot find any way to improve it,
and remains to this day, one of my favorites. Exposed correctly? I'd say yes.
|
I'd agree, that is exposed exactly how it should have been exposed.
|
|
|
|
09/01/2007 02:46:49 AM · #19 |
Originally posted by jemison:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by jemison:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
The correct exposure is the point where the picture looks the way you want it to. |
I would disagree...the exposure is different from the final result. An improperly exposed digital file may look OK, but may not have as much information as it could. Most of the information is in the right side of the histogram. An image that doesn't take advantage of that fact will not have as much info as one that does take advantage of it. |
Said differently, the correct exposure is that which gives you the result you want. |
said differently still, getting the result you want may have nothing to do with getting the exposure correct. |
If you get the result that you want then the exposure is correct. |
|
|
|
09/01/2007 09:11:18 AM · #20 |
|
|
|
09/01/2007 05:29:03 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by jemison:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by jemison:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
The correct exposure is the point where the picture looks the way you want it to. |
I would disagree...the exposure is different from the final result. An improperly exposed digital file may look OK, but may not have as much information as it could. Most of the information is in the right side of the histogram. An image that doesn't take advantage of that fact will not have as much info as one that does take advantage of it. |
Said differently, the correct exposure is that which gives you the result you want. |
said differently still, getting the result you want may have nothing to do with getting the exposure correct. |
If you get the result that you want then the exposure is correct. |
The OP asked about correct exposure - not getting the result he wanted. So I believe he was interested in what is considered a correct exposure. It is an accepted truism that you want to get as much exposure as possible without clipping. This yields the maximum amount of pixel information which will allow the maximum amount of post processing leeway. This is the most likely route to getting the result desired.
If the OP had simply wanted to find out how to get the result he wanted, why would he ask about "correct exposure"?
|
|
|
|
09/07/2007 07:06:38 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by trnqlty:
For film, expose for the shadows, print for the highlights.
For digital, expose for the highlights, print for the shadows. You can't recover lost data once you blow those highlights but you can always brighten them up if they are a little underexposed. |
That's true. I was taught to get as much of the color information as possible when shooting digital. I was told that it can always be "fixed" in photoshop. I think, however, that a good photo should be exposed correctly and not require "fixing" later. That being said, I am still in the process of learning how to properly expose a photo. Learning technique is important in order to acheive the look you want and I have a lot to learn myself. This discussion is helpful. |
|
|
|
09/07/2007 07:14:47 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by jemison:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Said differently, the correct exposure is that which gives you the result you want. |
said differently still, getting the result you want may have nothing to do with getting the exposure correct. |
This is very true, I screwed up lots of photos trying to get correct exposure. Now I expose to get the results i want (which is not always correct exposure demanded by situation). |
|
|
|
09/07/2007 07:18:44 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Read this article. |
"Please be aware though that for proper results you need to make these corrections while working in 16 bit (12 bit) mode in a RAW converter. Unlike what some people think, in RAW mode the camera is not doing any non-linear processing. All non-linear processing is done in the RAW converter. This is why if you're going to try this trick you must shoot in RAW and then manually readjust the image in the RAW converter before exporting the file into Photoshop. By doing this you'll be maximizing the data bandwidth of your entire system. Another reason to be working in RAW mode whenever possible.
Also be aware though that by doing this you are in fact effectively lowering the ISO used to capture the image, requiring slower shutter speeds and/or larger apertures. If you are hand-holding the camera, or shooting moving objects, the trade-off may not be worth the reduced noise level."
So even though it is a good idea it is still not "The absolute correct exposure" Just a suggestion to help maximize the signal to noise ratio.
So the correct exposure is the one that makes you happy.
At least that is my subjective take on the matter.
:-)
Message edited by author 2007-09-07 19:20:16. |
|
|
|
09/07/2007 07:22:48 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
So the correct exposure is the one that makes you happy.
|
I agree... am going back to Judi's portfolio to study correct exposure ;-)
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/28/2025 02:25:14 PM EDT.
