From: Floyd L. Davidson on
"David J Taylor" <david-taylor(a)blueyonder.not-this-part.nor-this.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>"Floyd L. Davidson" <> wrote in message news:87ljjedwhz.fld(a)apaflo.com...
>[]
>> Your definition of "get the exposure right" must be
>> vastly removed from mine.
>
>It may well do!
>
>> A quick look at an histogram, or better yet at a
>> highlight display, actually does offer some useful
>> information. The image display alone is worthless.
>
>Yes, I do have the flashing highlight display enabled (perhaps I should
>have mentioned that), so over exposure is immediately obvious, and a quick
>glance is all that is necessary to check.

Okay, now it makes sense. What you origially wrote sounded for
all the world like you were judging brightness from an image
display on the camera's LCD, which is near on impossible to do.

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd(a)apaflo.com
From: Floyd L. Davidson on
Steven Redgate <stevered3(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> If you don't want any part of the scene to clip, then
>> shoot the sunrize ETTR. �It is *absolutely* necessary to
>> post process, where you set the exposure for whatever
>> effect you like. �ETTR does *not* cause washed out
>> colors (inappropriate post processing might though).
>
>By "washed out" I mean the image is brighter than what I saw when I
>took the picture and to get the image to represent what I saw I need
>to darken the image. By either reducing exposure or some other method
>in post.

You are aware that ETTR is a two part process, part one
being boost the exposure to maximum possible, and part
two is to later reduce it to whatever it is that makes
your heart beat fast enough.

You *have* to do both.

>> >When I shot slide film I would spot meter
>> >on an area that I knew what the meter should read and set exposure
>> >accordingly, and in digital this also yields a good looking sunrise.
>> >The histogram, however, is not as far to the right as it could be.
>>
>> How can you spot meter on an area that "I knew what the
>> meter would read"??? �I don't understand what you mean
>> by that statement.
>
>I spot meter on something that, from experience, I know what I want
>the light meter to indicate for exposure. For example (for film, no
>ETTR), a gray cloud I set exposure so the meter reads in the middle of
>the exposure display, a white cloud plus 1 or 2 stops, a black cloud
>minus 1 or 2 stops.

So you take wild guesses at what shade various parts of the
scene are! (Isn't the whole idea of a meter supposed to be
to get away from these wild guesses about exposure??? :-)

Sarcasm aside (because certainly with film that was an
almost required method), you don't need to guess any
more. Digital cameras provide tools that will
positively show you where your image is in terms of the
camera's dynamic range capability. That's what a
histogram does.

>> If the histogram is not as far to the right as it could
>> be your image does not have as wide a dynamic range as
>> the camera is capable of recording. �The shadow areas
>> will have more noise than if it were exposed per ETTR.
>> If you want any specific *final* tone levels, set it
>> that way in post processing. �In essence, in post
>> processing drop the "exposure" to make the editor's
>> histogram show what you think the camera's should have
>> shown absent ETTR adjustments.
>
>Do you specifically reduce the exposure in post or some other method?
>There are exposure sliders in ACR and Lightroom, as well as CS4.

Yes, in post processing.

In the camera, try to set exposure as high as is
possible. The closer to clipping the better (indeed,
clipping of some types of highlights might be perfectly
okay). The camera is essentially going to record the
same amount of noise regardless of your exposure
settings, so increasing exposure increases the
Signal-To-Noise-Ratio.

In post processing reduce exposure (which reduces noise
at the same amount it does the highlights) to give the
desired brightness.

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd(a)apaflo.com
From: Bob Larter on
Steven Redgate wrote:
>> If you don't want any part of the scene to clip, then
>> shoot the sunrize ETTR. It is *absolutely* necessary to
>> post process, where you set the exposure for whatever
>> effect you like. ETTR does *not* cause washed out
>> colors (inappropriate post processing might though).
>
> By "washed out" I mean the image is brighter than what I saw when I
> took the picture and to get the image to represent what I saw I need
> to darken the image. By either reducing exposure or some other method
> in post.

Correct. You can reduce the exposure slider, or you can move the black
level on the tone curve to the left hand side of the histogram (which is
what I do), which retains the highlights.


--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
From: Porte Rouge on

> You are aware that ETTR is a two part process, part one
> being boost the exposure to maximum possible, and part
> two is to later reduce it to whatever it is that makes
> your heart beat fast enough.
>
> You *have* to do both.
>

Yes, I understand. My question is, after ETTR what exactly do you
yourself do in post processing. Do you adjust exposure, black point,
or something else?


> >> >When I shot slide film I would spot meter
> >> >on an area that I knew what the meter should read and set exposure
> >> >accordingly, and in digital this also yields a good looking sunrise.
> >> >The histogram, however, is not as far to the right as it could be.
>
> >> How can you spot meter on an area that "I knew what the
> >> meter would read"???  I don't understand what you mean
> >> by that statement.
>
> >I spot meter on something that, from experience, I know what I want
> >the light meter to indicate for exposure. For example (for film, no
> >ETTR), a gray cloud I set exposure so the meter reads in the middle of
> >the exposure display, a white cloud plus 1 or 2 stops, a black cloud
> >minus 1 or 2 stops.
>
> So you take wild guesses at what shade various parts of the
> scene are!  (Isn't the whole idea of a meter supposed to be
> to get away from these wild guesses about exposure??? :-)
>

It's not really a wild guess. It's like the earlier post about the
snow bank. I was taught and learned that if I spot metered the snow
and set exposure so the exposure display read dead center, the snow
would be gray in the photo. If I use 1 or 2 stops more exposure it
will be whiter. If I spot meter the black dog and the exposure meter
is centered the dog will be gray, so I use less exposure and it will
be darker.

Porte
From: Porte Rouge on

> I've come to the conclusion, that not one of you have ever used a camera
> with any decent live preview in it (as is available in all P&S cameras). Or
> that you've just never used any cameras at all.
>
> JPG files from the camera that can't reflect the camera's RAW dynamic
> range.
>
> Live previews that you can't see the colors and tonal ranges before you
> press the shutter.
>
> Nope. Not one of you have ever touched a real camera. You're all just
> useless trolls mentally masturbating each other with your envisioned mental
> problems.
>
> .

Could you talk a little bit more about your real P+S camera?

Louder...

Louder...

Oh...

Ahhhhhhh...


Thanks