FYI: To noobies: the Histogram doesn't tell you if you are properly exposed or not.
Oct 17, 2013 11:59:32 #
PS. If there were important details in the white or black areas you introduced, then added adjustments might make sense. In your test the focus was always on the coffee bag, which could have been a human face, for instance. It is common procedure with such a restricted area of interest to use spot metering on the subject or face only, in order to ignore the surroundings, which could change as you have done, and corresponding changes in camera settings would improperly expose the face. That is one reason for using fill flash on the face. Personally I have never figured how to use the histogram for adjustments, but now I am wondering if it may be best used for landscape photography where the whole scene is important.
georgevedwards wrote:
Very interesting, almost convincing but you stopped short in your very scientific test. You need more control groups. You said you used the same settings for each picture but the camera meter wanted to change the settings? You need at least one more group where you followed the camera's suggestions, and another control group where you made your own adjustments in response to changing histogram info, I am assuming that the theory is to have a centered curve?
Oct 17, 2013 12:03:36 #
rpavich wrote:
Frequently in the 'hog forums you'll read someone ... (show quote)
How true! Great info, rpavich!
:thumbup: :thumbup:
Oct 17, 2013 12:06:17 #
Also I noticed that your choice of subject, the coffee bag, has a perfect zone system built into it, which normally would not occur in most objects, like a face for instance. The coffee bag has highlights of pure white, there are perfect medium greys and absolute blacks, once your camera is set for this any type of light or dark or grey background would already be compensated for. But what if the subject was an object with mostly light tones with subtle detail, few greys and no absolute blacks? Or a mostly black object subtle dark details, with no shiny highlights... More tests!!
georgevedwards wrote:
PS. If there were important details in the white o... (show quote)
Oct 17, 2013 12:12:16 #
I wish someone would start a thread about "How Not to Let Your LCD Camera Screen Fool You into Thinking You Got the Exposure Right, When it's Really NOT Right" :roll:
Oct 17, 2013 12:18:04 #
MagicMark wrote:
I wish someone would start a thread about "How Not to Let Your LCD Camera Screen Fool You into Thinking You Got the Exposure Right, When it's Really NOT Right" :roll:
That would be very interesting to me, since I just got a camera with live view.
Oct 17, 2013 12:19:50 #
Sure, the histogram and meter lie to you.
In the example(s) the histogram and meter behaved properly and if understood and read right would lead back to the same exposure (artistic expression) wanted.
How did rapvich know his office exposure is? Trial and error? Hand held incident light meter?
Using a histogram and meter like that is just shooting all auto.
But the insults, name calling, talking down to, ego, self that goes around here grows weary. Very weary.
In the example(s) the histogram and meter behaved properly and if understood and read right would lead back to the same exposure (artistic expression) wanted.
How did rapvich know his office exposure is? Trial and error? Hand held incident light meter?
Using a histogram and meter like that is just shooting all auto.
But the insults, name calling, talking down to, ego, self that goes around here grows weary. Very weary.
Oct 17, 2013 12:56:11 #
rebride wrote:
Sure, the histogram and meter lie to you.
In the example(s) the histogram and meter behaved properly and if understood and read right would lead back to the same exposure (artistic expression) wanted.
How did rapvich know his office exposure is? Trial and error? Hand held incident light meter?
Using a histogram and meter like that is just shooting all auto.
But the insults, name calling, talking down to, ego, self that goes around here grows weary. Very weary.
In the example(s) the histogram and meter behaved properly and if understood and read right would lead back to the same exposure (artistic expression) wanted.
How did rapvich know his office exposure is? Trial and error? Hand held incident light meter?
Using a histogram and meter like that is just shooting all auto.
But the insults, name calling, talking down to, ego, self that goes around here grows weary. Very weary.
I don't understand how a histogram lies. The problem is that many who use it don't do a proper interpretation. Shooting fully automatic does not allow for selective adjustments. I consider it to be a tool and a very good one at that. I use it nearly 100% of the time - but I make my own decisions as to the quality of the image.
Oct 17, 2013 12:56:42 #
Effate
Loc: El Dorado Hills, Ca.
Pagoda wrote:
It's the amount of light falling on the object you are photographing. Not the whole scene. DOF does not make a difference. It the object that needs enough light to render the proper density.
Better yet photo a coal black piece of "monk cloth"
and then a white satin sheet. The monk cloth will need more light because it absorbs the light. The satin reflect light.
Better yet photo a coal black piece of "monk cloth"
and then a white satin sheet. The monk cloth will need more light because it absorbs the light. The satin reflect light.
It seems to me depth of field could make a difference if one has highly reflective objects in the background that are toned down or blurred by a shallow depth of field.
Oct 17, 2013 13:11:16 #
rpavich wrote:
Well...that's what I'm saying...it's NOT a guideline...the information it provides doesn't tell you if you're exposed correctly or not...the ONLY use it is, is to tell you if the scene exceeds your camera's dynamic range capability, and even THEN I'd argue...who cares? What if you blow out a portion of the image that you don't care about?
How about letting some of it fall into black?
It just doesn't really help.
How about letting some of it fall into black?
It just doesn't really help.
Well, it might help.
Blowing out highlights or blocking up shadows is OK if that's what you want, but one or the other might not be what you want. If a scene exceeds the camera's dynamic range, you need to know that so you can make choices about how you want to handle the situation. Let the highlights go to keep shadow detail? Let the shadows go to keep the highlights? Let both go? Shoot for HDR? It's an artistic decision that you've got to make and the only other indication of what you've shot is the image review on the camera's LCD, which is nowhere near accurate enough to judge.
But you're right -- there's no such thing as a right or wrong histogram. It just gives you information that you may need.
Oct 17, 2013 13:54:33 #
The one thing that has not been mentioned about the histogram is that it shows the distribution of light information for a JPEG file. If you are shooting RAW the distribution would be different.I try to avoid using it once I begin shooting for this reason.
That there is no correct histogram is a correct statement. Yes it can indicate where there may an over or under exposure concern, but the only correct exposure is the one which produces the image the artist wanted to produce.
People can post links to readings and writings on this subject all day, the goal in them is two-fold. First there is an attempt to help newer photographers to get better, and second to enhance the ego of the person writing the article.
Bottom line, it's a tool; nothing more, just a tool. The real proof is in the individual artistic expression of the artist.
That there is no correct histogram is a correct statement. Yes it can indicate where there may an over or under exposure concern, but the only correct exposure is the one which produces the image the artist wanted to produce.
People can post links to readings and writings on this subject all day, the goal in them is two-fold. First there is an attempt to help newer photographers to get better, and second to enhance the ego of the person writing the article.
Bottom line, it's a tool; nothing more, just a tool. The real proof is in the individual artistic expression of the artist.
Oct 17, 2013 17:28:46 #
lighthouse
Loc: No Fixed Abode
rpavich wrote:
...........This is why the histo is useless in determining exposure...(really just one reason) it also can't guess what your artistic intent is either...high key...silhouette...etc...
Just thought I'd explain.
Just thought I'd explain.
rpavich I really wish you hadn't left the thread.
I agree with everything you have said ..... apart from your last point which I have repeated here.
The histogram is very useful for ending up at your required exposure - but it needs a little bit of artistic/creative input from you.
I very frequently don't end up at my required exposure in camera.
I do this on purpose.
I use the histogram to help me capture as much noise free information in the file as possible.
Then I fine tune the exposure in post work, where I am working on a much much larger image, a much larger histogram, and with much better control.
Oct 17, 2013 18:45:21 #
cthahn wrote:
You had better understand a histogram first before you start telling everyone a histogram is useless. You just made the world know how stupid you are. You have a lot to learning to do. You also neglect to say what camera you are using and what lens and focal length. Also shooting at f2, using a 35mm lens,, your DOF at 10' is less than 2 feet. If a longer focal length was used, the DOF would be less. Rather shallow DOF. I use the histogram everything I take a picture if I want a good exposure.
Hello cthahn
I am not the type of person that enters in the drama of a thread.
You seem to be very knowable about all aspects of photography I for one judge a person response of a thread to the pictures that they post.
Forgive me but that is the only way that I know
who can talk the talk and walk the walk.
You have never posted I picture I cannot gauge your skill level would you be so kind to post a few pictures.
SORRY ever one I am not fueling the fire just trying to clear the air. thank you
saying hello from Pittsburgh
Oct 19, 2013 09:29:25 #
Oct 19, 2013 16:48:22 #
Can you elaborate? I would like to use the histogram but don't know how to incorporate it, all it does is tell me what the scene is. Do you require a camera that has the blinking blown highlight warning system? Recently me and another photographer were shooting indoor next to a window with light coming in. When we exposed for the indoor person/subject, the window was overexposed, when the window was exposed correctly everything else was too dark. I told him you had to use a flash to get around it, but I didn't really know. That is the problem, expose less for the highlights to be correct and try to brighten the shadows in processing, especially HDR? Maybe this is what is really meant by "Exposing To The Right"? Not overexposing as most seem to assume, but undexposing the rest of the scene to not have the few blown highlights, which may result in a darkened photo. With a RAW file it would be possible to boost the rest of the darkened tones in post processing. Have I got it right?
cthahn wrote:
You had better understand a histogram first before you start telling everyone a histogram is useless. You just made the world know how stupid you are. You have a lot to learning to do. You also neglect to say what camera you are using and what lens and focal length. Also shooting at f2, using a 35mm lens,, your DOF at 10' is less than 2 feet. If a longer focal length was used, the DOF would be less. Rather shallow DOF. I use the histogram everything I take a picture if I want a good exposure.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.