D700 Overexposing

[jaime_santillan]

<p>Hi<br /> New to the D700. Love it.<br /> So here's my question: Is there any chance that a damaged sensor will produce grossly overexposed images, or are the symptoms different than this?<br /> Recently went on a shoot and got dust particles on my sensor. I cleaned it up very carefully using the Eclipse E2 cleaning fluid with the swabs that come with it. After a couple of indoor shots to test for dust I found the sensor to be clean, nothing out of the ordinary. Two days later I went on another assignment, and shot some 150 pix on a sunny day. Hard to see on the back screen but when uploading all shots to my computer in the evening all of my shots were washed out. I've shot many times under similar circumstances and never had this results before.<br /> See a sample here: http://s34103.gridserver.com/JSP_5756.jpg<br /> I looked in the database and couldn't quite find people that had this kind of problem after cleaning a sensor. Any thoughts will be greatly appreciate it.<br /> Thanks<br /> jaime</p><div></div>

[ShunCheung]

<p>The EXIF data show ISO 250, 1/80 at f3.2 with spot metering. For an outdoor setting during the day, it should surprise no one that the image is over-exposed even though it is not under really bright sunlight.<br>

Was spot metering intentionally selected? Exactly which spot it was metering? That can be the source of the issue.</p>

<p>I would double check the camera's meter under known "sunny 16" conditions.</p>

[jaime_santillan]

<p>I never had used spot metering under those light conditions. I may have mistakenly set it up that way. In regards to the metering, I was focusing on the eyes and mouth area. It just seamed strange that all of the shots came out the same even under different lighting. <br>

You said: "I would double check the camera's meter under known "sunny 16" conditions." Where can I find that setting? <br>

Shung, Thanks so much for your help.</p>

[SolaresLarrave]

Jaime, "Sunny 16" is a convention for metering (that is, measuring the light before taking a photograph) that works as

the measure for photography when using meterless cameras (like old Leicas). It stands for closing the lens all the way down to f16 on a very sunny day, and

using the shutterspeed closest to the ISO number (say, in a sunny day, your model should be fairly well exposed, not

focused, by setting the camera at ISO 400, and then photographing with the lens at f16, at 1/500th of a second.

 

However, the matrix meter in your camera works better than that. In fact, you should turn your camera to meter (take a

light reading) always in matrix. Spot metering works only in very particular situations, and it's more often used in

macrophotography rather than in portraiture.

 

Besides, all digital sensors tend to overexpose; it is part of their algorithm, that's how they work. However, your

overexposure--which is very noticeable--comes from your using spot metering under these daylight conditions, for which

you would have been better served by the matrix or the average metering systems in your camera.

 

BTW, I'm not inclined to blame your sensor for these overexposures. It may be that your lens is hoodless; I recall having problems with my Nikon AF 80-200 until I got a hood for it.

 

Take care and enjoy your camera!

[brooks_lester]

<p>A note about Spot Metering.<br /> Spot metering can work in ANY light condition as long as you know how to use it. If it's used correctly, it's the most accurate method of metering, period. Spot metering is especially well-suited for portraiture because it allows you to expose accurately for the subject regardless of the level of light falling on other areas of the image, i.e., the background and sky behind the subject.<br /> If you were using spot metering for the above shot and were metering off the model's eyes and mouth then you were definitely overexposing the images. You were telling the camera to expose her eyes and mouth to O EV (medium gray) when in fact the irises and lips, which are darker than her skin, should expose to a lower (darker) value. The correct spot meter exposure for her face would be around +2/3 EV on the well-lit broad expanses of skin on the right cheek. <br /> One way to use the Spot Meter is by taking a reading off a calibrated gray card placed in front of the camera that is receiving the same light as the subject. For portraiture there's an even more clever way to do it:<br /> Example: my daughter's face (light-skinned Caucasian) meters at +2/3 EV. I can set my D700's spot meter to meter in Spot Mode at +2/3EV (Nikon actually uses +4/6, which is the same value) with the Exposure Fine Tune Function. This simply shifts the meter reading a specific amount, like +2/3EV in my case. The I place the spot/focus sensor over my daughter's face in the viewfinder image, get a reading, and lock the exposure with AE Lock/Hold. This gives me a very accurate exposure setting for her face (the subject of the composition) that isn't influenced by a bright sky in back of her or a completely darkened background that could throw off a Matrix Meter or Center Weighted metering mode. <br /> This method works perfectly and is a simplified version of what professional photographers do every day with handheld meters. The more you use this technique, the better you'll get a estimating how far above or below 0EV your subject's face exposes before you even pick up the camera. This method delivers you a very accurate exposure for your subject regardless of lighting in other areas of the frame and it's really easy once you do it a few times.</p>

<p> </p>

[hawkman]

<p>Jaime,<br>

Is this only outdoor or indoor as well? Does the camera expose correctly if you shoot inside a room or a dark area? Can you take several pictures of a light bulb in dark room and verify if you see any abnormalities?</p>

<p> </p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>First of all, verify whether your D700 was indeed set to spot metering unintentionally, perhaps during sensor cleaning. If that was indeed the case, clearly this was not a camera issue.</p>

<p>As I pointed out earlier, find a sunny outside situation and set the shutter speed to 1/ISO, e.g. 1/250 sec and see whether the meter give you f16 for center weighted. If so, that verifies that the meter is ok. Also check matrix.<br>

Moreover, form the habit to check exposure with blinking highlights and the histogram at least once in a while. We are in the digital era; there is no reason to find out that you have exposure issues only after you get home and miss opportunities to reshoot.</p>

[leighmcmullen]

<p><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=252804">jaime santillan</a> , I've found my D700 over exposing on several circumstances... Often enought that I wondered if it was Apple Aperture's RAW converter rather than the camera. Example the attached photos. the first was as MATRIX metering selected it, the second was as I "saw" it. there is about -2ev difference between them.</p><div></div>

[leighmcmullen]

<p>next photo</p><div></div>

[jaime_santillan]

<p>Francisco, George, Brooks, Arash and Shun... Thanks so much for your input. Obviously I have lots to learn about using the tools correctly. Seams like George isn't having a good experience with his D700 either, all-contrair in my case, I don't dislike my D700 I just need to learn how to use it correctly (obviously). <br>

<br /> Brooks, I like very much your definition of Spot metering. I will try your recommendation.<br /> Francisco, I'm feeling better thinking that It was my lack of skill and not the sensor what created those overexposed pictures.<br /> Arash, any specifics? <br /> Shun, point taken.<br /> Thanks guys</p>

[jaime_santillan]

<p>Leigh, good point. I use Lightroom and every-time I see an image uploading, it take a few seconds and the image changes once its fully uploaded. I wish I knew how to keep the image looking the way it does as its uploading before it converts. It always looks better even if the difference is small, as it processes, than when its finished. Do you know of any way to make that happen?</p>

[dansutton]

<p>to leigh, i think i prefer the "overexposed" image to teh darker one. more light and airy, sense of atmosphere, etc. </p>

<p>to the OP, pick up a copy of ansel adam's <em>the negative</em> adn read it cover to cover. then work for a couple of years on your spot metering. it's pretty much teh only metering i use now that i read the book, and i'm only a couple months into practice. very rewarding. also, maybe pick up a copy of photographic composition and practice with it. these books should focus your eye on your exposure and your composition that should prove very rewarding. either can be found on amazon or your library.</p>

[hawkman]

<p>Jaime,<br>

First try to see if meter is good as Shun pointed out, if the meter is OK but you continue getting shots that are severely washed out as the example you posted then I can help try something different, there is a remote chance for something else but don't worry about it now, first verify if meter is good and that you don't have any accidental EC applied.<br>

Guys, I actually find the D700 metering to be very accurate even in back-lit and complex situations, I have set mine to -1/3 EV and I get good exposure all the time :)</p>

[elliot1]

<p>"I wish I knew how to keep the image looking the way it does as its uploading before it converts." What you are seeing is the JPG preview. As Lightroom does not read Nikon's RAW data (normal), you are seeing a 'generic' conversion without in-camera settings applied. If you use Nikon's RAW converter like NX/NX2 or View NX, you will see your images with the in-camera settings applied - they will not change from the initial preview.</p>

<p>It is doubtful that you damaged your sensor while cleaning it. Even if you did, it would not affect your metering. Is it possible you accidentally turned your exposure compensation on? Is your camera working properly now? If not, I would reset it to factory setting and retest. If it is still not working, you may need to send your camera in to Nikon to have it checked.</p>

[photo5]

<p>Leigh, the first image is exposed correctly, the second one is under. Perhaps the reason you don't like the correctly exposed one, is that the light is very flat, so the image has somewhat low contrast. But the camera did a good job to balance the tones present in the image. Try an off-camera flash (off to the right in this case) next time. It would illuminate the subject and the cards, and leave the background darker.</p>

[liljuddakalilknyttphotogra]

<p>Now I admit that I've had some time adjusting to the sensor in the D700. But it's an amazing camera. What I do is I check my histograms - & I check all of my color channels. I did have issues with my red channel but I'm getting that under control.<br>

Are you looking at your histograms? That's a good place to start.<br>

Leigh - the second version - yes you have the windows & the outside more controled. But the room is dark & dreary now. I would potentially go somewhere in between as he is a tad too bright in the first version..... Still out of those two - - I prefer the first version of the shot.<br>

JMHO<br>

Lil :-)</p>

[julio_marcos]

<blockquote>

<p>I've found my D700 over exposing on several circumstances... Often enought that I wondered if it was Apple Aperture's RAW converter rather than the camera. </p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes, I found the same thing after trying Nikon's NX2 just for kicks - the D700 raws, specially indoors, are very over-exposed in Apple's Aperture. The difference is brutal. Unfortunately NX2 is a pain to work with, so I tried Lightroom 2, and with its Camera Profiles I can now get an excellent output that matches the camera's internal Picture Control.</p>

[galileo42]

<p>Come to think of it, Jaime says he focused on the eyes and mouth AREA. I don't see any real dark area there that could induce such over-exposure with spot metering. You don't think the right eye, which seems to be almost in the very center of the image, could do that, do you, guys?</p>

[robertash]

<p>Jaime,<br>

I've noticed overexposure on some images taken with my D700. I've begun getting into the habit, as suggested by several members above, of checking the histograms and adjusting the exposure accordingly. I've found that subtracting 1/3 or 2/3 of a stop usually produces the result I desire. </p>

<p>Bob</p>

[hawkman]

<p>

 

<p>Here is one example of 3D matrix metering, this is somewhat complex scene harsh light coming from the top and shadows at the bottom (thus flare) this is what matrix metering did, pretty good I guess, full shadow detail and not much blow up </p>

 

</p><div></div>

[leighmcmullen]

<p>UPDATE: there is a thread at apple support regarding aperture's tendency to over-expose / de-contrast images in the RAW conversion process. The current recomended solution is to ajust these settings in the RAW fine tuning menu of Aperture.<br>

---------<br>

The two photos I provided were the best examples I had at hand of this effect. The second photo is simply the first one dialed down 2 EV, but was a closer aproximation of what the eye actually saw. (the room was by no means as bright as it appears in the first photo) when I get back to my desktop I'll upload the shot as I intended it with the highlights and contrast adjusted.</p>

<p>Thanks</p>