Fixing Exposure problems

[SantaFe]

Too light or too dark images I know are not acceptable unless it is for some sort of special effect. But is there an objective standard for exposure or is it whatever suits the individual's taste? With all the tools available to adjust light and color my guess, at least for work for my eyes only, is whatever I happen to like will do. But for commercial purposes standards might be quite a lot different from what I think is or is not a good exposure. Your thoughts?

John Franklin

[Jeff Perry]

John. there is an objective standard for "correct" exposure general images, and it is the histogram, one that produces a balanced tonal range without blown out highlights or shadows.

Beyond that, artistic/visual interpretation comes into play. A perfectly exposed image may not convey the message the artist intends, hence the "photoshopping" of images to make them suitable for the audience and the message.

Jeff

[frank abramonte]

SantaFe, Jeff has given you good advice.
A perfectly exposed image doesn't always result in a good end result.
It's almost impossible to get a perfect print outside a dark room environment, thus the need for photoshop.
In the past, the tedious work was done in a dark room at great expense of paper, chemicals and time.
Today you are able to achieve the end result in a fraction of the time, providing you know your way around PSE.
Of course, it's important that you recognize what a good print is.

[Erin DigitalPhotosForMoms]

Jeff & Frank,

Would you say that in general, a histogram should look like a bell curve and should be centered on the graph?

PS - I'm just up the road from Naples, Jeff. Isn't the weather gorgeous right now?

[Codebreaker]

The Histogram is NOT a indication of a good or badly exposed image. It only shows you the distribution of Pixels along the tonal range from Shadows to Highlights. You have to apply the interpretation as to whether or not it meets your requirements.

The usual example I state is the Gray cat against a Black background. The image can be correctly exposed but still not contain any Pixels on the R.H.S of the histogram.

This is a very good site for explanations...

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/histograms1.htm

Colin

[Grant]

The Histogram is NOT a indication of a good or badly exposed image. It only shows you the distribution of Pixels along the tonal range from Shadows to Highlights. You have to apply the interpretation as to whether or not it meets your requirements.


Hear hear … the voice of reason!

[frank abramonte]

Erin , you just got your answer from Codebreake.
I never check histograms, but I think there a value in being able to read them.

[Codebreaker]

I do use the Histogram on the camera but only as a guideline inconjuction with the scene I've just shot. The most common thing I look for is that Highlights are not blown excessively in scenes that I know contain a reasonable distribution of tones.

Colin

[Chuck S.]

I've been looking at both ends of the histogram lately - highlights and shadows. The shadows end has become more important to me as I've shifted from DSLR's to Point & Shoot cameras; if the histogram is shifted too far to the left, the efforts to shift it to the right in post-processing reveal an excessive amount of noise. The dynamic range of the miniature sensors in compact cameras is just not very large. So, all other things being equal, I follow the old advice to "expose to the right".

BUT - I agree with Colin and Grant that the histogram is only a tool and not the be-all and end-all of setting a 'correct' exposure

[Daviskw]

I would say a good exposure is one where highlights and shadows you want to be seen are not blown, with proper contrast through the mid-tones to match your artistic purposes.

AND it looks good

Butch

[frank abramonte]

John Franklin, read and remember what Colin and Butch have posted.
If your highlights and shadows are either blown out or plugged then there is no color data that you can use to make corrections.
I guess that's one important bit of info you can use from a histogram.

[ljameso1]

I concur that there are no hard and fast exposure rules, just some general guidelines that make good starting points. Even in my film days I often shot from seriously under exposed to over exposed, not so much as to be sure to "nail" the exposure as because they often lent very different moods to the shot.

[SantaFe]

[quote=frank abramonte;430630]John Franklin, read and remember what Colin and Butch have posted.

Thanks for the observations. They've been helpful.