Another ETTR Discussion (Page 7): If you have a Sony camera with Zebra highlight warnings you can get the information you need before you press the shutter. And if you have a Nikon...

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

Rich1939 wrote:

By the time you check ACR blinkies it's after the fact. When you have tested your cameras abilities and know how far you can push it then you will be able to prevent blow outs. Not counting specular highlights of course

If you have a Sony camera with Zebra highlight warnings you can get the information you need before you press the shutter.

And if you have a Nikon with highlight weighted matrix metering (other brands offer this too) you can accomplish ETTR with almost no effort at all.

tdekany Loc: Oregon

rmalarz wrote:

Hmmm, I didn't see you there when I photographed it. Sorry to say, that's the color of the car.
--Bob

Either you, or I have something wrong with the eyes. There is and never was a color like that in the GM/Chevy lineup.

jackm1943 Loc: Omaha, Nebraska

Rich1939 wrote:

By the time you check ACR blinkies it's after the fact. When you have tested your cameras abilities and know how far you can push it then you will be able to prevent blow outs. Not counting specular highlights of course

Yes. That's the reason for the little experiment I described above. Also, I normally bracket around this increased exposure so I have more than one to chose from in ACR. Damn, I wish our weather would get better because all this ETTR/EBTR discussion is making me want to get out and photograph.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Let's not get distracted by the shiny objects. The discussion was regarding exposure. Which was conclusively proven to all those who could cogently follow.
--Bob

tdekany wrote:

Either you, or I have something wrong with the eyes. There is and never was a color like that in the GM/Chevy lineup.

Rich1939 Loc: Pike County Penna.

tdekany wrote:

Either you, or I have something wrong with the eyes. There is and never was a color like that in the GM/Chevy lineup.

The low sun angle would have had an effect on the colors,right?

tdekany Loc: Oregon

Rich1939 wrote:

The low sun angle would have had an effect on the colors,right?

Most definitely, but look at the SOOC photo.

If the car is silver, it will still be silver and wouldn’t have a brownish tint.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

H

Rich1939 wrote:

The low sun angle would have had an effect on the colors,right?

It's a bit off topic but, if the camera's date/time was right, the image was taken on 6/3/2015 at 6:51 Arizona time or about two hours before sunset, using AutoWB. For what it's worth, the colors in the SOOC image look better than the processed image. The shadows in the SOOC image are just a little dark. The SOOC image shows a silver car whose right front fender had been repaired some time after the rest of the car's paint had started to fade.

The exposure works out to a net EV of 12.33 which is only about 1 stop brighter than it needed to be for a proper image. The front fender area where the SOOC JPEG appears at almost 255,255,255 might not have been blown out with about a half stop reduction in exposure or ISO.

Since highlights in the SOOC are so close to not being blown out, maybe they aren't in the raw file either. It would be useful to see the RawDigger histograms for the original raw file.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

tdekany wrote:

Most definitely, but look at the SOOC photo.

If the car is silver, it will still be silver and wouldn’t have a brownish tint.

It would not start to become more golden until much closer to sunset.

tdekany Loc: Oregon

selmslie wrote:

It would not start to become more golden until much closer to sunset.

Right.

Rich1939 Loc: Pike County Penna.

selmslie wrote:

H br It's a bit off topic but, if the camera's dat... (show quote)

Central Arizona Sunset time for early June is about 7:30 or a 1/2 hour +/- from when that photo was taken.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

Rich1939 wrote:

Central Arizona Sunset time for early June is about 7:30 or a 1/2 hour +/- from when that photo was taken.

That's correct. I misread 19:34. Nevertheless, the AutoWB overrode the colors in the JPEG SOOC. The car really is silver.

Regardless, the color issue is a distraction. The image is still a poor example of the use of EBTR. We need an example with a wide DR where the highlight and shadow information are both important. That's not the case with any of the images Bob has posted on this thread.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Scotty, you seem to have a misconception regarding the use of ETTR/EBTR techniques. DR has little to do with applying the technique. Tonal placement does.
--Bob

selmslie wrote:

That's correct. I misread 19:34. Nevertheless, the AutoWB overrode the colors in the JPEG SOOC. The car really is silver.

Regardless, the color issue is a distraction. The image is still a poor example of the use of EBTR. We need an example with a wide DR where the highlight and shadow information are both important. That's not the case with any of the images Bob has posted on this thread.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

rmalarz wrote:

Scotty, you seem to have a misconception regarding the use of ETTR/EBTR techniques. DR has little to do with applying the technique. Tonal placement does.
--Bob

It's not the technique that is in question. It's knowing when it is useful and what benefits it provides. DR has everything to do with whether there is any need for ETTR/EBTR or if any benefit is derived from using it.

For example, in a scene with a very narrow DR, the technique merely raises the tones. When you lower them during PP absolutely nothing is gained. There is no noise reduction and the tonalities are exactly the same as if you had not used the technique in the first place.

As Rongnongno pointed out in ETTR and EBTR - I finally understood the opposition... It is a doozy. (he used Uuglypher's chart) there are some scenes whose DR is so wide that ETTR is not appropriate - you need to resort to HDR.

You may recall ETTR-EBTR Challenge where I posted, What am I asking for here is for you to post any evidence of a scene where ETTR/EBTR can solve an exposure situation better than the simple caution expressed by, “Don’t blow the highlights.”

Nobody has accepted that challenge! Is is because you can't? All we have seen are demonstrations of how it's done.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Scotty, every photo I've posted over the last three or so years has responded to your challenge. ETTR/EBTR is the technique I've used to make the initial exposures in those photographs. It's a simple matter of metering the brightest portion of the scene and placing that value such that it's appropriate for the tonality. The DR of the scene in immaterial in choosing to use ETTR/EBTR. Placement of the brightest values is. For example...
--Bob

selmslie wrote:

It's not the technique that is in question. It's ... (show quote)

(Download)

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

rmalarz wrote:

Scotty, every photo I've posted over the last three or so years has responded to your challenge. ...

No, none of them has.

That image simply heeds the caution, “Don’t blow the highlights.” However, it does exhibit some vary effective post processing. The range of tones is from about 12 to 240 in the finished image so it looks nice.

I don't ever recall seeing any EXIF information for your images to tell us what exposure was actually used. In this image the clouds and the cactus are in full sun so a net EV of about 15 (ISO 400 1/1000 @ f/11 or equivalent) should have worked fine. But the black hills on the right seem artificially dark. That has nothing to do with ETTR - it's from the post processing.

To respond to my challenge you would need to show that the result would have suffered (more noise, loss of shadow detail or degraded tonality) if the same image had been captured with a stop or two lower exposure or ISO. That you have never done.