What you are missing if you do not 'get it right' - regardless of file format
Nov 21, 2019 10:52:36 #
Get it right is not about 'perfect exposure' despite what it says.
Getting it right is to insure that you expose the way you want it to achieve the effect you want from over to under exposed there is nothing wrong IF intentional.
So what are are you missing if you do not 'get it right'?
A single thing: Potential.
- If you expose exactly as you want to your post processing (PP) will be minimal and satisfying.
- On the other hand to get it wrong (by getting it right - as far as exposure goes -) you are in trouble. Using PP will help but since PP is a give and take you will never achieve what you wanted because the potential that could have been offered has been killed in the first place.
Getting it right is to insure that you expose the way you want it to achieve the effect you want from over to under exposed there is nothing wrong IF intentional.
So what are are you missing if you do not 'get it right'?
A single thing: Potential.
- If you expose exactly as you want to your post processing (PP) will be minimal and satisfying.
- On the other hand to get it wrong (by getting it right - as far as exposure goes -) you are in trouble. Using PP will help but since PP is a give and take you will never achieve what you wanted because the potential that could have been offered has been killed in the first place.
Nov 21, 2019 10:56:07 #
Nov 21, 2019 10:59:44 #
My sense is that, beyond quickly changing circumstances that aren't conducive to careful and decisive metering, most photographers do exactly as you say once they have learned the basics of exposure. I assume that's what imagemeister meant by "Dah!" 
The perception - on UHH at any rate - is that many folks are sloppy. I think this is an erroneous perception based on the frequent commentary, pro and con, about "fixing" in pp.
The perception - on UHH at any rate - is that many folks are sloppy. I think this is an erroneous perception based on the frequent commentary, pro and con, about "fixing" in pp.
Nov 21, 2019 11:12:58 #
Rather than making excuses for poor results, one might consider instead: if you want better pictures, take better pictures.
Nov 21, 2019 11:17:45 #
imagemeister wrote:
Dah !
I quite agree, it is self evident but i see too many 'critics' or 'comments' that do not take into account the camera holder intent as well as too many folks who overcook in PP due to poor exposure for their subject in the first place.
Nov 21, 2019 11:42:36 #
I think that it is useful to mention that "getting it right" can be a compromise, and the photographer has to decide on a stragegy. If the photographer is not going to adjust values in an image editor, then the strategy most probably would be to expose for natural-looking mid tones and let shadows and highlights fend for themselves. However, if one plans to do adjustments after the image is exposed, then a different strategy would yield better results.
Because of the characteristics of digital photography, in which detail can be pulled out of shadows much more deeply than blown highlights can be recovered, "getting it right" consists of exposing for the highlights and then bring up the tones below that to a natural-looking level. If the dynamic range of the scene exceeds that of the sensor, then (without using HDR) the photographer has to decide whether to sacrifice some highlight detail or some shadow detail. But in any case, "getting it right" for post processing often means an image that looks too dark without processing, in order to retain highlight detail.
Because of the characteristics of digital photography, in which detail can be pulled out of shadows much more deeply than blown highlights can be recovered, "getting it right" consists of exposing for the highlights and then bring up the tones below that to a natural-looking level. If the dynamic range of the scene exceeds that of the sensor, then (without using HDR) the photographer has to decide whether to sacrifice some highlight detail or some shadow detail. But in any case, "getting it right" for post processing often means an image that looks too dark without processing, in order to retain highlight detail.
Nov 21, 2019 12:04:15 #
[quote=Rongnongno]Get it right is not about 'perfect exposure' despite what it says.
Getting it right is to insure that you expose the way you want it to achieve the effect you want from over to under exposed there is nothing wrong IF intentional.
Rongnongno and kymarto Got it right.
Overgeneralizing - The perception - on UHH at any rate - is that many folks are sloppy. I think this is an erroneous perception based on the frequent commentary, pro and con, about "fixing" in pp.
Too Negative - Rather than making excuses for poor results, one might consider instead: if you want better pictures, take better pictures.
Getting it right is to insure that you expose the way you want it to achieve the effect you want from over to under exposed there is nothing wrong IF intentional.
Rongnongno and kymarto Got it right.
Overgeneralizing - The perception - on UHH at any rate - is that many folks are sloppy. I think this is an erroneous perception based on the frequent commentary, pro and con, about "fixing" in pp.
Too Negative - Rather than making excuses for poor results, one might consider instead: if you want better pictures, take better pictures.
Nov 21, 2019 12:08:34 #
emmons267 wrote:
Appreciate the critique Overgeneralizing - The perception - on UHH at any rate - is that many folks are sloppy. I think this is an erroneous perception based on the frequent commentary, pro and con, about "fixing" in pp.
Nov 21, 2019 12:34:37 #
Linda From Maine wrote:
My sense is that, beyond quickly changing circumst... (show quote)
Most of us know it not "fixing" in pp, it is "continuing a well rounded process" in pp.
Nov 21, 2019 12:47:10 #
CHG_CANON wrote:
Rather than making excuses for poor results, one might consider instead: if you want better pictures, take better pictures.
Aha, but you can only take better pictures with an expensive full frame camera. When better pictures are made, $5,000 cameras will make them.
Andy
Nov 21, 2019 18:05:23 #
dsmeltz wrote:
Most of us know it not "fixing" in pp, it is "continuing a well rounded process" in pp.
Most of us know it not "fixing" in pp, it is "continuing a well rounded process" in pp.
Absolutely right. PP is as much a part of a good photograph as taking the image in the first place. Think about music for a second. The recording of music is only the first step in the process of creating the finished music. A good clean recording of the instruments is necessary, but only the beginning.
Nov 21, 2019 19:07:38 #
Rongnongno wrote:
Get it right is not about 'perfect exposure' despi... (show quote)
Yes - this absolutely flies in the face of people who claim that they get perfect pictures out of their cameras without any editing. The problem with that is that only they can see how wonderful their images are. In reality, they are often - but not always - dull, lifeless, lacking impact or visual interest, etc.
Nov 22, 2019 06:50:01 #
Perfectly exposed pictures of a badly composed boring subjects are exactly that. Not sure why the over concern of “correct” exposure when modern cameras get the exposure right 90% of the time without much fuss from the photog. Spending time on composition, planning and understanding the quality of light will pay much higher dividends. I humbly offer you my $0.02.
Nov 22, 2019 06:56:33 #
Linda From Maine wrote:
...The perception - on UHH at any rate - is that many folks are sloppy. I think this is an erroneous perception based on the frequent commentary, pro and con, about "fixing" in pp.
You may be right, Linda. But of all the "members" on UHH (How many are there now?), I would suspect that most who are unhappy with their own results, don't share their "mistakes" with us (the Silent Majority?) and are looking for ways to "save" their shots.
I agree that many Hogs create images that they know will not be "right" (what they want the image to ultimately look like) with an eye toward using their post-processing skills on a particular scene. They are not "sloppy", as you point out. But of the countless images that are shared with me by shooters of all levels of experience, I'd have to say that "most" need some more instruction or need to put the instruction they have been given to better use. Their results have mostly been "sloppy" at best.
Nov 22, 2019 07:42:47 #
Frantically searching my photographer’s bible for the term “right” or the phrase “get it right.” Will someone who occupies the dais enlighten me. I certainly don’t want to “get it wrong.”
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.