Expose Left, or Expose Right (or neither?)

[Colin Southern]

In my research on this subject I found a forum that use's ETTR (sparingly ie. +1/3 - +2/3 ETTR) for shooting higher ISO and I must say with outstanding results, as the Gent had posted images he had taken as proof, and he has plenty of them. The settings I obtained are for Canon cameras (I listed above).

Hi Carl,

High ISO modes don't change the native sensor sensitivity - nor for all intents and purposes the noise level - so in other words, at high ISO modes you're operating closer and closer to the noise floor - at which point you generally can't afford to expose an image with up to a 2 stop "safety margin" above the highlights (most metering seems to give in the region of around 1.3 to 2 stops safety margin).

Or put another way, "the higher the ISO, the lower the effective dynamic range capability of the sensor and thus (especially when combined with higher dynamic range scenes) the more one MUST expose to the right if one want to avoid visible noise".

Hope that makes sense.

I think most camera manufacturers assume a purely reflective scene (ie 4 stops) - exposed to the right (ie no safety margin) at a certain noise level, when determining the maximum ISO mode they'll allow on the camera (in simple terms anyway).

[Carl in Louisiana]

Hi Carl,

High ISO modes don't change the native sensor sensitivity - nor for all intents and purposes the noise level - so in other words, at high ISO modes you're operating closer and closer to the noise floor - at which point you generally can't afford to expose an image with up to a 2 stop "safety margin" above the highlights (most metering seems to give in the region of around 1.3 to 2 stops safety margin).

Or put another way, "the higher the ISO, the lower the effective dynamic range capability of the sensor and thus (especially when combined with higher dynamic range scenes) the more one MUST expose to the right if one want to avoid visible noise".

Hope that makes sense.

I think most camera manufacturers assume a purely reflective scene (ie 4 stops) - exposed to the right (ie no safety margin) at a certain noise level, when determining the maximum ISO mode they'll allow on the camera (in simple terms anyway).

Thanks Colin,

I think so.

Part of the in camera settings include lowering the sharpening and the contrast (other in camera setting include; High ISO NR set to standard, lighting optimizer/highlight priority turned off, the last one I turned off shortly after getting the camera) and I suppose that helps more so with the noise level that ones sees, I'm not sure at this point. Some of the sharpening can be added back in PP after NR, according to the workflow described. I will be shooting inside tomorrow night and will try out these settings and PP steps to see what happens. I will also be trying out both lenses. I figure it can't hurt to try....if it helps all for the good then and if not at the least I have learned much more about the in camera settings and how to adjust them. At any rate I will post some of them and will be looking forward to your comments on them good or bad. I figure it's all part of the learning process.

Carl

[Colin Southern]

Hi Carl,

If you're shooting RAW then none of those settings affect the RAW file (although depending on your converter choice, may or may not be automatically applied in post-production).

[Carl in Louisiana]

Hi Carl,

If you're shooting RAW then none of those settings affect the RAW file (although depending on your converter choice, may or may not be automatically applied in post-production).

Hey Colin,

Thanks!

I suppose that is why they advocate using DPP to begin PP as it will apply these setting when the RAW files are downloaded. I was not satisfied with DPP to start with as it is limited as to what all it can do. However I will follow the directions and see what happens. It could be a longer learning experience than I first thought....LOL DO you know if LR4.1 can be set up to apply the camera settings to the RAW file?

Carl

[Macmahon]

Hi Carl
I've never found a way. I don't think it can be done in LR. As someone pointed out above, the in-camera routines are proprietary to the manufacturer so I wouldn't really expect anything other than DPP to interpret Canon's embedded data. OTOH if someone knows that it can be done in ACR then it will be possible as the RAW engines are the same. All that said, I still don't see the point of automatically applying settings that apply to in-camera JPEGs to the RAW images. As good as the 5D3 LCD is it is still not good enough to get a good idea on critical sharpness or noise in my opinion. In my workflow I evaluate each RAW image exactly as it comes from the camera and decide at that point whether and what adjustments need to be made, where I can see on my computer monitor the effect more clearly than is possible on the camera LCD.
Tim

[Carl in Louisiana]

Hi Carl
I've never found a way. I don't think it can be done in LR. As someone pointed out above, the in-camera routines are proprietary to the manufacturer so I wouldn't really expect anything other than DPP to interpret Canon's embedded data. OTOH if someone knows that it can be done in ACR then it will be possible as the RAW engines are the same. All that said, I still don't see the point of automatically applying settings that apply to in-camera JPEGs to the RAW images. As good as the 5D3 LCD is it is still not good enough to get a good idea on critical sharpness or noise in my opinion. In my workflow I evaluate each RAW image exactly as it comes from the camera and decide at that point whether and what adjustments need to be made, where I can see on my computer monitor the effect more clearly than is possible on the camera LCD.
Tim

Thanks Tim,

More food for thought ! I suppose I'll just use LR as I am use to it and PP my RAW files as I normally do.

[arith]

Hey Steve,

In my research on this subject I found a forum that use's ETTR (sparingly ie. +1/3 - +2/3 ETTR) for shooting higher ISO and I must say with outstanding results, as the Gent had posted images he had taken as proof, and he has plenty of them. The settings I obtained are for Canon cameras (I listed above).

I shoot mostly indoors and without flash and that is why I am so interested in this thread and the material I found on other forums to study and learn the technics applied. I would like to bring my photography to the next level and think this route is it. I have made the necessary in camera adjustments and will be testing these along with the suggested PP steps. I hope to be posting some of these shots soon and hopefully with near results as I have seen others do.

Cheers Carl; I must say I'm a bit confused by the noise thing. Sometimes I don't get any where I expect to and other times lots of noise but don't know why.

[Carl in Louisiana]

Cheers Carl; I must say I'm a bit confused by the noise thing. Sometimes I don't get any where I expect to and other times lots of noise but don't know why.

Hey Steve,

It is quite a frustrating subject to say the least and can cause one a terrible headache. I am determined to find some level of understanding and control over it. Perhaps I should be looking more into the PP skill level and improving there.
But for now I will plow ahead and change when I hit a dead end, it's my nature (hardheaded) (plus I have to see for myself). I better stop or the list could go on....LOL

[ajohnw]

One thing I have noticed about web comments on shoot to the right is bright white in the scene. Also no comments about what metering mode was used. Personally I don't think it's wise to take pages like that on face value. The bright white probably has a lot to do with the "improvements" and in real terms one of the links shows that it is a method that may be of use for obtaining the best jpg the camera can produce on these types of shots. All of the adjusted raw shots are the same on the link that shows them. The camera under some circumstances is likely to say to itself that there is some serious white in the shot and expose accordingly leaving margin for error. I find many compacts do exactly the same sort of thing leaving no detail in dark areas even under easy shooting conditions. Fortunately it's usually easy to lift detail out of blacks and near blacks even on jpg's. You would think that cameras with true live view would do something about that - look for areas that are going to be too dark and adjust the camera curves and exposure accordingly. Even the mirror less ones don't..

Off topic but
I was also intrigued to see the comment that the camera rear screen isn't good enough to ensure critical focus. That never ever occurred to me as I use the viewfinder. I can't say that I'm impressed with even a 5D's capability in that area but it is usable just as are the others even an ancient 300D. Having decided to try to use an Olympus Pen instead of a dslr the problem with electronic views of any sort has really been rammed home. Taking the Pen as an example the clip on viewfinder has 1.4mp if you buy the right one. The sensor has 12mp. Detail is lost because of the reduction so they provide a 7x magnified view with of course only covers a small area of the shot. That is the only way the camera can be manually focused to the pixel level of the camera. It needs image stabilisation even on moderate lenses - which they choose not to offer on Pens when the camera is being manually focused. People buy Panasonic longer lenses for them to get round that.

The same problems exist in trying to use a rear screen to check focusing. Often worse as they can have fewer pixels so more magnification is needed. Basically even focusing well enough for a good 1/4 final size reduction needs a magnified view and even reducing to 1/8 size is dubious without it. As things stand if some one wants really critical manual focusing or checking buy a 1D and what they have done in that area is a bit strange. Or use a heavily magnified view. From other peoples microscope work with 5D mk?? it seems a full resolution partial frame can be obtained when tethered to a PC. Might be of use to some people but means carrying a lap top about. Me - I manage to focus to 0.001mms or better on a microscope with a 40x objective using the view finder and an eye cup to keep out ambient light. People might find an eye cup helps in other circumstances. Some people love an excuse to upgrade. I like to keep things cheap. Many things added to cameras as they evolve are gimmicks and can be done far more quickly in other ways. One day some one might bring out an electronic equivalent of an old time film slr plus sensible bells and whistles but I very much doubt it as upgrades occurred very very infrequently.

On topic again Pens help in this respect as the preview comes up in the electronic view finder showing all the info and exposure problems in the actual shot. No problem with sunlight wiping out the view on the screen this way either. Mentioned as I suspect dslr's will go this way over time and can no longer use the slr term any more. The whole point of the slr aspect is to focus what ever lens is on it. Seems many people don't even bother to try to use it. The other approach is also much cheaper of course.

John

[speedneeder]

...I suppose that is why they advocate using DPP to begin PP as it will apply these setting when the RAW files are downloaded...

Just to clarify - DPP does apply the default camera settings to the image you see on the screen in DPP, though the actual RAW data is what's in the file. You can turn off all display adjustments before exporting to .jpg, and if you open the same RAW file in LR or other, you will see that is in fact, RAW! I hope this makes sense. You probably already understand this, just wanted to make sure.

[Carl in Louisiana]

Thanks Brian and everyone! I'm trying to understand!
I have read so much lately that my head feels like it wants to burst. I think I'll take a day and just relax and forget some of this and then pick it back up where I left off at.

Just to clarify - DPP does apply the default camera settings to the image you see on the screen in DPP, though the actual RAW data is what's in the file. You can turn off all display adjustments before exporting to .jpg, and if you open the same RAW file in LR or other, you will see that is in fact, RAW! I hope this makes sense. You probably already understand this, just wanted to make sure.

[Colin Southern]

Hey Colin,

Thanks!

I suppose that is why they advocate using DPP to begin PP as it will apply these setting when the RAW files are downloaded. I was not satisfied with DPP to start with as it is limited as to what all it can do. However I will follow the directions and see what happens. It could be a longer learning experience than I first thought....LOL DO you know if LR4.1 can be set up to apply the camera settings to the RAW file?

Carl

Hi Carl,

In my opinion, having camera settings applied to the RAW file as part of the RAW conversion is a PITA - I wouldn't want it because it would be like shooting at a moving target. Far easier to ignore the camera ones and just apply them as presets as part of the conversion process (of which you can setup as many as you wish in the likes of ACR or LR).

[Carl in Louisiana]

Hi Carl,

In my opinion, having camera settings applied to the RAW file as part of the RAW conversion is a PITA - I wouldn't want it because it would be like shooting at a moving target. Far easier to ignore the camera ones and just apply them as presets as part of the conversion process (of which you can setup as many as you wish in the likes of ACR or LR).

Thanks Colin,

I have started looking into the presets in LR but have not made but one change so far. I will look into that a little more and make changes. I do not like using DPP, probably because I didn't give myself enough time with it, then I can forget all the in camera settings and concentrate on improving my skills in other areas like photography and PP.
Besides if I understand it correctly DPP does not apply the settings until you convert to jpg?

[Colin Southern]

Besides if I understand it correctly DPP does not apply the settings until you convert to jpg?

No idea I'm afraid Carl, I don't use it.

[speedneeder]

Carl, by default DPP applies the camera settings to the RAW file on your monitor only.
The RAW file is still...RAW.
You are correct that any settings applied when converting to jpg are then part of the jpg file. The NR settings are less obvious because you have to change tabs on the tool pallet to see what they are. I typically have 'standard' high ISO NR turned on, at least when shooting hockey games

[Carl in Louisiana]

Thanks Colin and Brian,

I have it now! I think I will just stay with LR4.1 and Nik's software as I have copied TeamSpeed's image pretty darn close. I'm sure with time and practice with those two software programs I'll get it even closer but for now I am very happy with it.
This has been a rewarding journey so far and I have learned so much more thanks to everyone.

Carl

[speedneeder]

This has been a rewarding journey so far and I have learned so much...

Me too!