trying to learn

[Rusty]

I've been off of Auto since the week after I got my dSLR.

Now I'm getting brave and starting to experiment with various buttons.

http://www.pixentral.com/hosted/1vhRSljd4A9rq1H87g3LFIoPB3p0_thumb.jpg (http://www.pixentral.com/show.php?picture=1vhRSljd4A9rq1H87g3LFIoPB3p0)

Why -2.33 ... because I screwed up. I wanted -2 because I thought two stops would remove the blown highlights. I probably went overboard and may have had better results with -1.3 or -1.6

I guess it's just a matter of experimenting. I can't think of any scientific way to decide how much compensation to try. Right?

Rusty

[GaryK]

Rusty

Great thing about digital.. you can experiment and learn and get results instantly.

I think you will start to develop a feel/eye for it. I am starting to get a bit better at guessing how much to knock down to compensate for blown highlights via the histogram.
From there, I would think compenstating before pressing the shutter will come next, providing I think about it.:D

Of course this won't happen overnight... but hopefully someday.;)

[deedeeO]

Rusty, if you have a Canon, you can view the histogram of your images right from camera...select your image, then press the info buttom twice...you'll get a quick read out of your metadata and a histogram. Here (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/understanding-histograms.shtml) is a link on how to interpret histograms and dynamic range (which is the no. of bits that your camera's sensor is capturing the image....in most cases we are working with a 8 bit dynamic range which translates to a 256 brightness levels between absolute black and absolute white; however, these dSLRs are capable of 16-bit which is a 1495 dynamic range - HUGE!! and sometimes just too much.)

When I am taking pictures, I try to achieve a histogram that looks like a nice gaussian curve (bell shaped) that is evenly distributed amongst the 256 levels. If you obtain a sharp peak on the left side of the histogram, you've got too much black...thus too dark of an image....if your peak is sharp on the right side, you've got too much white....thus a blow out or too bright.

There is no right or wrong answer on how to adjust your compensation...it truely depends on the light conditions that you are shooting, the lens, aperature, iso, etc. Take one setting at a time and really play with it to see how it changes your image. Once you become comfortable with a setting, add another and make adjustments to see the changes..once comfortable, add more... Word of advice...after playing, make sure you reset your settings....So many times, esp with the compensation setting, I forget to set it back to zero and a great kodak moment comes up and I end up either blowing the image, or get tons of graininess because it is too dark..:eek:

Have fun and keep playing...I never use my auto settings anymore..I am loving the control:D

[deedeeO]

Rusty

Great thing about digital.. you can experiment and learn and get results instantly.

I think you will start to develop a feel/eye for it. I am starting to get a bit better at guessing how much to knock down to compensate for blown highlights via the histogram.
From there, I would think compenstating before pressing the shutter will come next, providing I think about it.:D

Of course this won't happen overnight... but hopefully someday.;)

And despite all the scientific jargon I just threw at you Rusty, nothing works better than your own eyes!!!

[Rusty]

Well, Duhhh,

I forgot all about looking at the histogram, all it takes is one or two clicks when the image is in the rear screen.

My Nikon, and I guess Canon is probably the same, gives flashing of highlights if the exposure blew out part(s) of the image. That's what is signaling me to consider an EV adjustment.

If I start looking at the histogram as well, that may speed up the "development of an eye" in guessing at how much compensation to make.

Thank you both for pointing me in the right direction.

Rusty

[bnk1953]

them flashing parts (on my konica/minolta) shows up both when blown out (all white) or all black. The real world calls them there flashing parts "blinkies" - believe it or not.
~bruce.

ps - have fun trying out different things. When I started learning I spent most of my time on depth of field (what is in focus and what is not). Took one item outside and played with the aperture settings until I had a fairly good feel of the depth of each f-stop on the lens on my camera.

[chas3stix]

Rusty,
"Blinkies" will definitely let you know when part or parts of your photo are overexposed. I use this because,for me, it's quicker than reading a histogram.
Chas

[Rusty]

Chas, you are right, nothing could be quicker than simply seeing flashing highlights on the playback screen. That's what's been alerting me to problems and is what I will continue to see.

I can sure see the value of a histogram to evaluate the effect of the EV fix I tried. I went back to the flower and proved what I found out when the original image was opened in Elements.

http://www.pixentral.com/hosted/19Tm1WEL8nbvsRleOzcfrHlxJaTF4_thumb.jpg (http://www.pixentral.com/show.php?picture=19Tm1WEL8nbvsRleOzcfrHlxJaTF4)

If I had thought to look at histogram, I would have known immediately that -2.33 was way, way too much of a compensation. Click Delete and dial in another compensation value.

Gary, you are right and... the second best thing is, you ain't limited to 36 exposures :)

Rusty

PS - when I get better at this, I'm really going to get dangerous -- I'm going to start in on the White Balance button :)

[chas3stix]

Rusty,
Want to open up a can of worms......?
Just open a thread about white balance....
(Especially in mixed lighting)....:)
Chas

[TonyW]

Nick posted an interesting article about blinkies in another thread that made me think again about correct exposure. The thread is here:

http://www.photoshopelementsuser.com/forum/showthread.php?t=25799

It's written for raw but the comment about camera histograms being conservative about blinking highlights is interesting - of course I'm sure all cameras are different but I suspect with mine exposing to get rid of them all is not such a good idea.

Tony

[Rusty]

Well, Tony,

If you are trying to confuse me, you succeeded. I got lost somewhere between linear and non-linear :)

It's probably difficult to see in the 72ppi image posted, but when I took the first image, the playback screen blinked strong highlights around the centers of the flowers. That histogram, on the other hand, isn't obviously extreme -- at least not to me. When I open that image in PSE, those areas are clearly blown and detail is lost when I zoomed to "actual pixels".

If I had simply looked at the histogram after the first image, I would not have seen the need for doing it again with compensation.

There were no blinking highlights on the playback after the compensated image, but it appeared pretty dark to me on the screen. This is where, if I had looked at the histogram, I clearly would have decided to reshoot with less of a compensation. I didn't try much of a zoom on the last image to see how much noise, if any, was introduced.

I just love the solution cited in one of the references you pointed me to: get your exposure almost to blown highlights, but not quite there :)

That's what I'm going to shoot for; I guess it's sorts like being a little bit pregnant. :D

Rusty

PS - wait 'till I start with some questions on ISO !!