Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
ETTR
Page <prev 2 of 5 next> last>>
Jan 3, 2017 12:15:02   #
SusanFromVermont Loc: Southwest corner of Vermont
 
Gene51 wrote:
You will get your best bang for the buck if you shoot ETTR and raw. Forget about raw+jpeg, because of the reason you stated above.

But I do need to clarify one point - you are not overexposing. You are properly exposing to capture as much tonal range as you can - without blowing the highlights. Sometimes this will involve "overexposure" but often, and especially with high contrast subjects, it may involve "underexposure" - because the key to getting the optimum exposure is not an image that "looks" good, but one that is exposed as high as possible while still retaining highlight detail, and in high contrast situations the image may appear darker than you'd normally like. Shooting raw allows you to minimize/control individual channel clipping, and reveal both highlights and shadow detail that would be lost in a jpg.

Oh, and to do it properly, without guesswork, use the spot meter function in your camera. You'll have to do a little trial and error to see how much you can add to a highlight reading before you blow it out. I suggest that if there is snow, or a sunlit white building like a church, read the highlight, and do a series of bracketed exposures starting at +1 stop, in 1/3 stop increments. Your camera may go as high as 2 or more stops before you get to the point that you can't recover detail in the raw file in post processing. That will be your upper limit. This works 100% of the time, without guesswork.

It makes sense to google "zone system for photography" and become very familiar with the concept - it will change the way you think about getting the right exposure.
You will get your best bang for the buck if you sh... (show quote)

And you ought to be able to get back those "overexposed reds" in PP. Amazing what detail is still in there when you pull it out!

Reply
Jan 3, 2017 12:27:26   #
jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ
 
jradose wrote:
I have an issue with ETTR, exposure to the right. On paper, it makes sense to me, slightly overexpose so you don't get a lot of noise in shadow or dark areas of the photograph. However, I have found, at least with me, it usually overexposes particular colors, especially reds. Even when my histogram shows that I haven't gone off the scale to the right, my reds are overexposed, and I lose some detail. What am I doing wrong? I am interested in hearing what other fellow hoggers feel about ETTR.


You don't lose detail in reds, you lose a little saturation. Fixing this in post is very easy and you can make the photo really pop and at the same time you have less noise to contend with.

Reply
Jan 3, 2017 14:15:25   #
Retina Loc: Near Charleston,SC
 
Gene51 wrote:
... It makes sense to google "zone system for photography" and become very familiar with the concept - it will change the way you think about getting the right exposure.

I never thought about it in these terms before, but reading posts about ETTR brought it to mind. We all learned to "expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights" when exposing and developing B/W film. With digital it's "shoot for the highlights and develop for the shadows". If it hadn't let 30 years slip between the darkroom and computer, the transition might have been a bigger adjustment. Back then I usually overexposed (and underdeveloped) up to two stops, now I find myself metering -0.7 to -2 EV.

Reply
 
 
Jan 3, 2017 14:22:23   #
TheDman Loc: USA
 
# of photo forum geeks that use ETTR: thousands
# of top landscape pros that use ETTR: 0

Reply
Jan 3, 2017 14:23:53   #
TheDman Loc: USA
 
jeep_daddy wrote:
You don't lose detail in reds, you lose a little saturation. Fixing this in post is very easy and you can make the photo really pop and at the same time you have less noise to contend with.


No, he's talking about blowing out the red channel, which will cause loss of detail.

Reply
Jan 3, 2017 14:37:02   #
amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA
 
jradose wrote:
I have an issue with ETTR, exposure to the right. On paper, it makes sense to me, slightly overexpose so you don't get a lot of noise in shadow or dark areas of the photograph. However, I have found, at least with me, it usually overexposes particular colors, especially reds. Even when my histogram shows that I haven't gone off the scale to the right, my reds are overexposed, and I lose some detail. What am I doing wrong? I am interested in hearing what other fellow hoggers feel about ETTR.


First, a question... Is your computer monitor calibrated? If not, you are "chasing your tail" judging your image exposure or color accuracy.

Even when calibrated, monitors are a bit limited in what they can display. There's some clipping of the color gamut with all monitors. Some designed specifically for graphics work are more accurate, while general purpose consumer-grade monitors most likely clip more. A good print done with a photo quality printer is likely to give more accurate color rendition.

Next, it depends upon the camera.... brand to brand there are differences... and there can even be differences with different models within a particular brand.

ETTR may or may not be needed. It really only applies to auto exposure modes... If making manual exposures you should be able to dial things in more accurately. (Otherwise, why bother using manual?) With manual exposure, you might choose some overexposure for a "high key" look, or dial in some underexposure for a moodier or silhouette effect.

Do you work your images in a software such as Lightroom? If so, do you find you often need to increase exposure, that your images are often a little underexposed? If so, you would probably benefit from using a bit of ETTR.

ETTR isn't exact, by any means. It's just a "tweak" to compensate for a common tendency with auto exposure to underexpose. This might be deliberate on the part of camera manufacturers. They may calibrate their camera metering systems to "protect" highlights... But maybe have gone a little too far with it.

The main idea behind ETTR is that there's actually more latitude in the highlights than we typically give credit for. It may not be obvious on a computer monitor, only seen in a print. But ETTR is done primarily to avoid underexposure, so that exposure doesn't need to be increased in post-processing much or at all... because any time you do that tends to amp up the appearance of noise.

Experiment with your particular camera and closely observe your auto exposed images in post-processing. If you most often find yourself having to adjust exposure upward in post-processing, try setting ETTR. I'm still learning the nuances of a pair of cameras I got about a year ago... but on the two I used for about five years prior to those I knew I needed about +2/3 Exposure Compensation when shooting in the shade or on cloudy days and about +1/3 E.C. out in full sun. This was my "starting point" and I would make further E.C. adjustments for subject tonality variations from "average", as needed. I also knew that at high ISOs it was usually better to use +2/3 E.C. Sometimes even +1 E.C. So far, with my newer cameras I'm finding I seem to need less ETTR.

ETTR is, at best, an "educated guess". It simply takes advantage of the fact that's it is a little "safer" to err slightly toward over-exposure, than it is to under-expose. This is counter-intuitive for an old slide film shooter like me, but with some digital cameras it works. Highlights are actually more recoverable than shadows, at least with the DSLRs I've been using. It might be different with yours, so you really need to look closely at your own images and experiment a bit with your own gear.

Reply
Jan 3, 2017 14:45:18   #
amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA
 
TheDman wrote:
# of photo forum geeks that use ETTR: thousands
# of top landscape pros that use ETTR: 0


Top landscape pros who use auto exposure modes: 0.

Landscape shooters typically have ample time to determine an accurate exposure. Usually that's most easily done with fully manual exposure. But even if for some reason they choose use an AE mode, overall technique for landscape photography typically allows plenty of time to figure out and use an "ideal" exposure.

ETTR is a technique to get better exposure... on average... shooting fast with auto exposure.

Auto exposure isn't a pro, amateur or "forum geek" mode. It's a necessity at times, to shoot some types of subjects in certain lighting conditions. For example, a wildlife or sports shooter tracking moving subjects in and out of shade will need to use one of the auto exposure modes. Even when subjects stay in the same light, I'll use it at times when their moving so sometimes I'm shooting them from the shadowed side, sometimes from the sunlit side.

(Note: Manual mode with Auto ISO is no longer manual... It's another form of auto exposure.)

Reply
 
 
Jan 3, 2017 15:55:05   #
TheDman Loc: USA
 
amfoto1 wrote:
Top landscape pros who use auto exposure modes: 0.

Landscape shooters typically have ample time to determine an accurate exposure. Usually that's most easily done with fully manual exposure. But even if for some reason they choose use an AE mode, overall technique for landscape photography typically allows plenty of time to figure out and use an "ideal" exposure.

ETTR is a technique to get better exposure... on average... shooting fast with auto exposure.

Auto exposure isn't a pro, amateur or "forum geek" mode. It's a necessity at times, to shoot some types of subjects in certain lighting conditions. For example, a wildlife or sports shooter tracking moving subjects in and out of shade will need to use one of the auto exposure modes. Even when subjects stay in the same light, I'll use it at times when their moving so sometimes I'm shooting them from the shadowed side, sometimes from the sunlit side.

(Note: Manual mode with Auto ISO is no longer manual... It's another form of auto exposure.)
Top landscape pros who use auto exposure modes: 0.... (show quote)


So only people who use auto exposure modes want the maximum DR from their camera?

Reply
Jan 3, 2017 17:12:26   #
Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)
 
TheDman wrote:
# of photo forum geeks that use ETTR: thousands
# of top landscape pros that use ETTR: 0


Oh....really?

http://youtu.be/t7a54CWqJGQ (Breitung)

http://youtu.be/0LojM0DPIJ0 (Dickman)

Reply
Jan 3, 2017 17:58:49   #
forjava Loc: Half Moon Bay, CA
 
My remarks assume full photographer control over both lighting and the numerous antics of the camera, like auto ISO, not to mention PP effects like Lightroom ACR's Auto Tone. Now, about that spurious red:

I’ve been shooting a collection of 19C silver subjects like a coffee pot. I am deviating from histogram orthodoxy in that my camera's histogram is pushed signirficantly rightward, intentionally; yet, these raw shots are never touching the right edges of the D810's JPEG histograms.

This higher exposure makes silver shinier, which is what my customer wants. The shots are high-key, with no blown highlights and with no shadow-recovery issues -- I guess I am doing ETTR, but surely for my own reasons, as amfoto1 has suggested above can be legit.

Yesterday, I noticed some unwanted red on my new 34" curved IPS monitor. I found I could easily take down the red with the Lightroom's Saturation slider for red. An alternative is to lower the Exposure slider (or shoot accordingly). I am also able to (barely) discern some blue and green. I eventually experimented and found with my pro strobes (I.e., not speed lights so I'm talking about shooting in manual mode...), that a cure for my red was to change the power setting to less power on one strobe!

Consider your lighting. If your red is blown out to the point of losing detail, then crank down one light bit-by-bit until you cure the problem according to Lr Develop module's rendering of the image and histogram -- or try adjusting any other lights, as needed. You could perhaps introduce a diffuser close to the subject and distant from a light source, as well, to prevent blown highlights.

I am finding that minor adjustments in lighting sources' (1) intensities, (2) tilts, and (3) twists are useful to test. The inclination and elevation of your subject wrt your camera may influence what works in your subject, as concerns highlights and shadows. For example, a slight rearward tilt of a coffee pot rid me of an obnoxious reflection -- presumably by changing the angle of incidence of the reflection. The effects of this give-and-take may be easier to see with silver (specular) subjects, but how light works does not depend on the subjects.

I could mention, wrt your own exposure concerns, that Lightroom tripped me up this week until I noticed it wants to do Auto Tone for me, which is not done very well at all for my silver subjects. So, I’ve been undoing Auto Tone until I figure out how to permanently prevent it in the Library module and in the Develop module.

All of !! the above is based less on any expertise than on my learning-by-doing during the last few days with silvery stuff, a demanding subject matter, especially as mine is not tented. Lacking abundant expertise, I'm not certain that I am on the beam, however, and not sure what you are shooting, either, but maybe this can help out.




jradose wrote:
I have an issue with ETTR, exposure to the right. On paper, it makes sense to me, slightly overexpose so you don't get a lot of noise in shadow or dark areas of the photograph. However, I have found, at least with me, it usually overexposes particular colors, especially reds. Even when my histogram shows that I haven't gone off the scale to the right, my reds are overexposed, and I lose some detail. What am I doing wrong? I am interested in hearing what other fellow hoggers feel about ETTR.

Reply
Jan 3, 2017 18:09:15   #
selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA
 
TheDman wrote:
# of photo forum geeks that use ETTR: thousands
# of top landscape pros that use ETTR: 0

That's pretty close.

Of course, to achieve the highest quality in a landscape image you need to be conscious of the dynamic range (DR) of the scene, you should be capturing a raw image and you should avoid blowing the highlights. Don't obsess over exposure methods, watch the blinkies. When in doubt, bracket.

The consensus of all photographers who really understand the principles of ETTR (including the originator, Michael Reichmann) is that ETTR should be used at or near base ISO for scenes with a DR nearly as wide as the camera's. That's rare today but it was common nearly 14 years ago when Reichmann developed ETTR.

It is also well understood that noise reduction is not a legitimate benefit that results from the use of ETTR. Noise reduction comes from an increase in exposure. At low ISO, any modern camera will select an exposure high enough to swamp all noise.

Landscapes usually have a medium to low DR. If you shoot from a tripod at low ISO (as you should with landscapes), ETTR provides no demonstrable benefit.

I have been asking for a couple of years for a demonstration of any benefit from the use of ETTR at low ISO for an ordinary DR scene and nobody has been able to produce one.

See also my post ETTR-EBTR Challenge where I challenged any user of ETTR/EBTR to provide evidence of any benefit at low ISO for a normal to low DR scene. Nobody has stepped up to this challenge.

In the absence of any evidence to the contrary we can only conclude that ETTR is a waste of time promoted by someone who apparently does not understand the basic photographic principles at work.

Reply
 
 
Jan 3, 2017 18:47:56   #
imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida
 
kymarto wrote:

To my eye slight noise in the shadows is nowhere near as objectionable as blown highlights. Therefore unless I am confident that I have the time to really measure the light correctly I never expose to the right, and in fact in fast situations I usually underexpose (by the meter) by 0.3, 0.7 or 1 EV depending on the situation.


, and in fact never use raw .....

Reply
Jan 3, 2017 18:49:01   #
imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida
 
selmslie wrote:
That's pretty close.

Of course, to achieve the highest quality in a landscape image you need to be conscious of the dynamic range (DR) of the scene, you should be capturing a raw image and you should avoid blowing the highlights. Don't obsess over exposure methods, watch the blinkies. When in doubt, bracket.

The consensus of all photographers who really understand the principles of ETTR (including the originator, Michael Reichmann) is that ETTR should be used at or near base ISO for scenes with a DR nearly as wide as the camera's. That's rare today but it was common nearly 14 years ago when Reichmann developed ETTR.

It is also well understood that noise reduction is not a legitimate benefit that results from the use of ETTR. Noise reduction comes from an increase in exposure. At low ISO, any modern camera will select an exposure high enough to swamp all noise.

Landscapes usually have a medium to low DR. If you shoot from a tripod at low ISO (as you should with landscapes), ETTR provides no demonstrable benefit.

I have been asking for a couple of years for a demonstration of any benefit from the use of ETTR at low ISO for an ordinary DR scene and nobody has been able to produce one.

See also my post ETTR-EBTR Challenge where I challenged any user of ETTR/EBTR to provide evidence of any benefit at low ISO for a normal to low DR scene. Nobody has stepped up to this challenge.

In the absence of any evidence to the contrary we can only conclude that ETTR is a waste of time promoted by someone who apparently does not understand the basic photographic principles at work.
That's pretty close. br br Of course, to achieve ... (show quote)



Reply
Jan 3, 2017 19:00:54   #
selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA
 
Uuglypher wrote:

If you are going to continue to promote ETTR/EBTR you need to provide the audience with more that just a description of how to use it. You need to convince everyone why they should use it with legitimate, reproducible evidence of benefits.

Before you can do that you have to learn the principles that are behind it.

1. You have never recognized the difference between the sensor's and the raw file's dynamic range (DR). See: What is the Camera's Dynamic Range? and What is the Camera's Dynamic Range? - Part 2.
2. You have never acknowledged the relationship between the scene's DR and camera's DR.
3. In every example you have posted so far, ETTR/EBTR has been achieved by moving the histogram to the right, never to the left. That means that all of your examples have a narrower DR than the camera. If it were ever wider, the histogram would need to move to the left, decreasing exposure.
4. You have never acknowledged that, once the exposure has been set, the ISO can be varied without changing the ratio of signal to noise (S/N) that determines the visibility of noise. I have proved that extensively in the two links in #1 above.

How how about it? Isn't it time for you to put up or shut up? If you can't accept the ETTR-EBTR Challenge and produce some evidence of useful benefits by way of real images, stop wasting everyone's time with your words, PowerPoint slides and screen shots.

Reply
Jan 3, 2017 19:04:21   #
selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA
 
imagemeister wrote:
, and in fact never use raw .....

And you may never have to if you watch you blinkies and if your scene's DR is not wider than the camera's.

People who shoot only JPEG can also take advantage of in-camera adjustments (like Nikon's Active D Lighting) that perform a modest amount of highlight an shadow recovery. That may be all you need.

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 5 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.