Jump to content

Consistently Underexposing Images, Please Help!


tom_collins3

Recommended Posts

<p>Hello! I am having a problem where I am consistently underexposing images, almost exactly 1 stop underexposed. I shoot RAW and understand that the camera's LCD is a JPEG preview (and that I really SHOULD be looking at the Histogram for exposure) but is there any way to make the LCD JPEG preview closer to what the RAW image really looks like? I shoot with a Canon 7D camera body. Thanks!</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 68
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

<p>[[but is there any way to make the LCD JPEG preview closer to what the RAW image really looks like]]</p>

<p>Technically speaking, a RAW image doesn't look like anything until it's developed. </p>

<p>However, for a more accurate histogram, don't leave the in-camera Picture Style set to "Standard." Try "Neutral" instead.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Is this using flash or all ambient? TTL flash or manual or auto?<br>

Is this using the live view feature or just the LCD when reviewing?<br>

Is this manual mode or semi-auto?<br>

What metering mode?<br>

Any third party lenses or flash that you're using?</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>You should be able to turn down the brightness level of the LCD display on the camera through the camera's menu system. On my canon 450D I had to lower the display brightness about 3 steps lower than the factory default setting in order to get a more accurate display. Prior to that all my shots were slightly underexposed as well.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>I am having a problem where I am consistently underexposing images, almost exactly 1 stop underexposed...<br>

is there any way to make the LCD JPEG preview closer to what the RAW image really looks like?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It looks like you're asking two different things. Do you mean the RAW file and histogram show correct exposure and you want the JPEG to reflect that, or are the RAW file and histogram actually underexposed?</p>

<p>And, if you're actually suffering from underexposure rather than an LCD or JPEG that's too bright or dark, then details about how you're doing the metering and what logic and techniques you're using to arrive at your chosen exposure would be good.</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>@Rob, Good point and thanks I'll have to try that. <br>

@Dan F., it seems to be worse when I'm using flash, off camera, triggered with ETTL Pocket Wizards, shooting with the flash in ETTL. LCD review. Manual exposure. Spot Metering. Canon lenses (17-55 2.8) and Canon flash 580 EX II. <br>

@Dan T. and Matt good tip, thanks!<br>

@Simon, My histogram and RAW file are underexposed, but my LCD preview looks spot on (which leads me to not check my histogram as often as I should). I shoot in Manual, spot metering, one-shot auto focus, typically choose the ISO first based on the environment, then choose an appropriate aperture based on DOF required, then dial in the shutter speed. </p>

<p> </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>I shoot in Manual, spot metering</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You need to find a white or grey wall, evenly lit. Use your spot meter to take a reading off it, set the aperture shutter speed combination to whatever it recommends (make sure no exposure compensation is dialled in), and take a picture with the plain wall filling the whole frame. If the histogram is piled up in the middle, then the meter is fine, and it's your technique that's the problem.<br>

<br /> If it isn't bunched near the middle then the meter is off and needs to be recalibrated. Many cameras have a function in the menu to allow you to fine tune the meter.<br>

<br /> Note: many cameras deliberately slightly underexpose the image about a third of a stop, so most likely, if the meter is working correctly, the histogram will be bunched about a third of a stop to the left of centre.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I don't think spot metering works as far as TTL flash is concerned. I believe the camera will meter the flash in the evaluative mode, but I could be wrong. And then throw the Pocket Wizards and how they communicate with the camera is spot metering and all told, it seems like a recipe for a headache in terms of getting accurate and consistent exposures. If you are putting the camera in manual mode, I am not so sure why you even need spot metering? Establish your exposure (use a gray target if you need to) and that's it. Now by establishing you exposure, I am taking about how you want the scene to look without the flash. In some instances, you might want the background/ambient under-exposed by a stop or two, but in any case, establish your ambient exposure and then add the flash. I believe that shooting manually with the flash in TTL that the system will treat the flash as fill, so if you want more light (key) from the flash you will need to dial in positive flash exposure compensation.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>If things are truly worse when using off camera flash in ETTL, then I'd say it isn't necessary to darken the LCD to fool yourself into brightening things up. I have set my LCD brightness down because in the heat of things, I am guilty of going with the LCD. It isn't a bad thing, necessarily, just know what you are doing and know how to work the tools to get what you need.</p>

<p>However, ETTL flash metering is notorious for underexposing anyway, particularly in evaluative mode, but even in averaging mode. Get familiar with what it does in the configurations you use and comp the flash. Flash metering is separate from ambient metering, so selecting spot metering, whether in manual camera mode or not, does not affect what the flash will do. Unless you have your flashes in manual flash mode, the flash response will always vary, according to what ETTL thinks is best (normally underexposed).</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I'll just echo that relying on what the LCD "looks like" is going to be risky. Not only is it not really intended to be all that accurate, but what it "looks like" is also affected by the ambient lighting in which you view it.</p>

<p>Yes, you should rely on the histogram.</p>

<p>Dan</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>"However, for a more accurate histogram, don't leave the in-camera Picture Style set to "Standard." Try "Neutral" instead."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Exactly, also see <a href="http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/right-hista.shtml">Settings for an Accurate Histogram</a> (Or rather read that as "more accurate Histogram".)</p>

<p>Another thing to watch out for is a feature on certain Canon cameras called <strong>Highlight Tone Priority</strong>. If I recall correctly, it underexposes the image by quite a bit to preserve highlight detail. Canon's own DPP software will compensate for this automatically by brightening the image, but other RAW converters don't pick up on it and will leave you with underexposed pics.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>G Dan has the answer. You wrote:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>My histogram and RAW file are underexposed, but my LCD preview looks spot on (which leads me to not check my histogram as often as I should)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That's the problem. Never trust the brightness of the lcd to guage exposure. Plenty has been written about how they are usually wrong in this respect. Yes, you can adjust it to be closer, but it will never be as informative as the histogram. If you are not sure of exposure, ALWAYS look at the histogram. Better yet, set the camera to show the histograms for the three color channels separately. I use the LCD to check composition and focus but never consider it in evaluating exposure. It's the wrong tool for that.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Ok, I tried many of the things suggested (turned the LCD brightness down, changed the picture style to Neutral, and took a "correct" exposure of a neutral wall) and here's what I'm still experiencing:<br>

When I took a "correct" manual exposure of a neutral wall (light tan) the histogram appeared to be properly stacked all in the middle. However, when I take a "correct" exposure of my daughter inside on the couch, or of a patio chair outside in my back yard, (or just about anything else for that matter) the meter says that my exposure is going to be correct, but the histogram is at least 1 stop, almost 1.5 stops underexposed. I tried all metering modes, and nothing changed. The in-camera meter is saying that my exposure is going to be dead on, but the resulting histogram is at least 1 stop underexposed. <br>

Does this mean that there is something wrong with my in camera meter? </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Light meters in cameras are just simple minded devices. They see the world as medium gray. Anything lighter than medium gray they 'underexpose' trying to make it medium gray. Anything darker than medium gray they overexpose to reproduce it as medium gray. You have to compensate for the under or over exposure from the dumb meter. You need a pilot in the plane. Spend some time with Brian Peterson's book Understanding Exposure. <br>

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_0_40?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=understanding+exposure+by+bryan+peterson&sprefix=understanding+exposure+by+bryan+peterson<br>

Good luck!</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>@G Dan, I was shooting full manual, so no exposure compensation was set.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You do know that there's also exposure compensation both in the flash menus as well as in the camera's menus. Flash menu will over ride camera menu unless flash compensation is set to 0.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>The in-camera meter is saying that my exposure is going to be dead on, but the resulting histogram is at least 1 stop underexposed.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Maybe post a pic or two so that we can evaluate? Other than that, I am getting a bit lost... is this with or without flash? Obviously the camera meter is a reflective meter designed to return an 18% gray value. One way to test the meter is to simply use a gray target card. If you spot meter on the card, filling the frame with the card, your histogram should have a spike right in the middle. The problem with adding flash is that you now have two exposures to be concerned with: the ambient and whatever value the flash is putting out. I do fee your pain, when we shot Canon I wasn't particularly happy with how the camera metered scenes. It wasn't so much that scenes were underexposed but rather that the meter seemed inconsistent scene to scene. One time I would be overexposed, the next underexposed. And flash just exacerbated the issue. On paper anyway, the 7D is to have a better meter system than any of the Canon cameras I ever used.</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>The meter only tells you what is under the spot (when using spot metering mode), and if it's a fair skinned person, you need to dial in some + exposure compensation. If you don't, when you take the photo, the meter will be quite happy making their face 18% grey, while at the same time the histogram will show underexposure as it is showing what the entire image looks like, not just the spot you metered from.</p>

<p>Or in other words: why make it hard for yourself by using spot metering?</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>"Or in other words: why make it hard for yourself by using spot metering?"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I couldn't agree more.<br>

I see that all the time though. People seem to be under the impression that spot metering is more precise, but they usually fail to point it at "the right spot" due to a lack of understanding.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...