Hi, all.

There was an excellent article in the latest DSLR Photography mag about over-exposing your pictures in RAW format.

I had thought that it was better to under-expose and avoid blowing highlights, but it seems that there can be a lot of noise in the darker areas of the photograph.

The problem that I have had is that many of my photograph previews have shown extensive blown highlights, BUT... it turn out that the preview picture on the camera screen is based on the JPEG that would result from your CURRENT camera settings for brightness and contrast. So, here's the tutorial.

First of all, alter your camera settings to Neutral or Faithful or whatever applies no brightness or contrast adjustment to the photograph. This will give a preview on the screen much closer to the RAW data.

Next, after exposure, check the histogram. If none of it is bunched up against the right side, then over-expose in appropriate steps until the histogram reaches the right side of the graph. Be careful to check that none of the individual colours have over-exposed.

Be aware that even if your blown-highlights warning is flashing on the screen, there can still be plenty of detail in the highlights.

The picture preview might look [LIFTED] awful, but that's the point. Once you work on the brightness and contrast, you should have a high quality result.

Que?
Also, my camera lets the operator adjust brightness and contrast (possibly other controls too) of the actual screen on the back.
The histogram is the best indication of over/under exposure, in my humble opinion.

Mark

Histograms FTW!

++;

My preview screen can be set to indicate areas where the highlights are washed out. The article showed that even where the preview screen indicates blown highlights, the detail can still very much exist in the RAW data. Over time, I have probably ditched quite a few decent pics because of the highlights warning.

Now I feel like a noob

I base my pics on the shot using the histogram for reference then if needed clean up the RAW file later. My DSLR can show me RGB histo's (I expect most do anyway) but I always seem to think to technically so focus on trying to get a good shot instead of the perfect (technical) shot.

This however maybe complete twaddle as I'm drinking a beer at the moment.

Lomo FTW

I'm fecking itching for a Holga!!!! Its seems like the polar opposite of trying to achieve technical perfection. Come on Christmas, hurry up and bring me what I want!

yes - everybody buy a crap camera with your Christmas pressie money. All this digital perfection could drive a mad man sane.

I presume this is sarcastic. Cant quite tell though. I'll do the defensive bit anyway.....

What I really like about the idea of Lomo type stuff is that it can put the fun back into the whole process. I find striving for the technically perfect picture (although I do enjoy it) can take some of the fun out of photography. Having a dick around with a toy camera and producing some unique images whilst getting to play with some 120 film in the process is a concept I could really get on with. That doesnt mean I would abandon the DSLR and all that comes with it.

No.



Well, yes. That is what I was thinking too. Sometimes being forced to work with something less than perfect can bring out interesting results.

Then again, working with something you know inside out can also produce very interesting results.
Familiarity doesn't always have to breed contempt.

Mark

It seems the only answer is to hve many and various cameras, and to have the time to devote to playing with them all!

*likes this idea*

+1