digitaldog

You can't evaluate exposure and thus clipping in Adobe Camera Raw or any Adobe converter. You need something like RawDigger to do so. 

I can do this for you if you upload the NEF to something like Dropbox. 

Raw or JPEG capture?

Depends on the goal for the old Kodak Gray card. Exposure or gray balancing (which you'd never do with raw data). 

Finding an affordable gray(s) for exposure, white balancing, gray balancing, or making DCP profiles isn't complicated or expensive. And color space agnostic (unlike sets of RGB values). 

27 minutes ago, hjoseph7 said:

Im a using a dye sub printer so it might take some type of different color management ? 

Short answer is no.

You report the screen and print don't match. 

Why are my prints too dark?

Why doesn’t my display match my prints?

A video update to a written piece on subject from 2013

In this 24 minute video, I'll cover:

Are your prints really too dark?

Display calibration and WYSIWYG

Proper print viewing conditions 

Trouble shooting to get a match

Avoiding kludges that don't solve the problem

High resolution: http://digitaldog.net/files/Why_are_my_prints_too_dark.mp4

Low resolution: https://youtu.be/iS6sjZmxjY4

12 minutes ago, hjoseph7 said:

On the screen it does not looks that bad, but when printing it becomes overwhelming. 

Well that's a different issue (a failure of sound color management). 

Resolution confirmed: 

Resolution:

The original (and untagged)? I get collar readings (with both 5x5 and 11x11 samplings) of aStar 1 and bStar 7. 

My fix was done in Adobe Camera Raw and was pretty quick and simple. The settings used are shown to the right, along with the edit itself. Mostly just an adjustment of Tint/Temp (-19 Temp) and it looked 'down' to me, so I increased brightness using Exposure (+.40). There is no highlight clipping with the new setting, but the original shadows are clipped to black a bit (no big deal):

Edit: The Lab values are shown with the cursor over the boy's white shirt and it's pretty dead nuts neutral (-1/-1).

Good testing. I might deliberately shoot a test 3 EV under, but it seems the answer to the initial question for the OP is:

1. Don't under-expose your images as grossly as you are doing (multiple articles about teaching* him how not to were provided).
2. Don't push 'exposure' (brightness) in a raw converter in sRGB on grossly under-exposed images.
3. Understand the green overlay isn't in the data; it's a preview only.  The data is still very suboptimal from the click of his shutter. 
4. Using 16-bit data doesn't help in any of the GIGO: Garbage In Garbage Out practices above in any of this. 

* "Learning is not attained by chance. It must be sought for with ardor and attended to with diligence." -Abigail Adams

On 3/3/2023 at 12:42 PM, frans_waterlander said:

Any ideas and/or solutions? 

Yes: see above!

Image under-exposed for the article; at least 1.5 stops. From meter (and several stops from optimal raw exposure). 

Open in Adobe Camera Raw lite in Elements, up 'exposure' as seen below with  red overlay. 

Open in Elements, apply Auto Haze Removal: no green overlay.

Again begging the question, WTF is wrong with Frans's raws? 

On this end, no matter what I set for Edit>Color Settings (Elements 2023/Mac) , from raw (Adobe Camera Raw lite) I get sRGB. I'm told in the help page that Optimize for Printing should give me Adobe RGB (1998), but that's not the case. Setting "Allow me" doesn't do this either. I can choose 8-bit or 16-bit but nothing gives me anything but (ugh) s(Satanic)RGB.

I tried rendering Frans NEF using Adobe Monochrome and, no clipping overlay after Haze Removal. 

See Michaels post about color spaces in Elements (another Frans cross posting) here:

https://community.adobe.com/t5/photoshop-elements-discussions/what-is-latest-acr-version-that-works-with-pse-2021-and-windows-10/m-p/13633057#M88836

I'm wondering if what's unique to Frans's raw and green overlay is:

Underexposure 3EV, “over develop” (push “Exposure” more than 1.3+) and other kind of wacky rendering edits. I have to dig up some brackets I made for my exposure article I don't think Frans will read but I don't believe I ever underexposed that far for the piece. Minus 1 was about as far as I thought was needed. Might have to actually shoot something that underexposed. But I'm not using anything that produced an NEF, another variable.

Yes, the green overlay disappeared by zooming in. 

Thanks, Tony, that's clearer; yes, we're on the same page here. Well almost. 

I set the clipping as you did in Adobe Camera Raw on the NEF, and yes, the red (then green after Haze removal) in highlights seem to match. I think you and I and John are in agreement on that. 

But I don't see any blue (or colored thereafter) black clipping after Haze Removal. Odd. 

And I don't see this on anything on my end. I thus far haven't found a raw that behaves like Fran's. Not an exhaustive search by a long shot. But odd. 

Here's the puppy example with Adobe Camera Raw set to clip (overlay on) massively. 

Then the image in Elements after running Auto Haze Removal. No overlay. WTF is wrong with Frans raw?

One of the exposure URLs didn't make it correctly and it's a great site:

http://www.onezone.photos

Welcome to All Things OneZone
This site supports my book…
The Optimum Digital Exposure

https://www.rawdigger.com/howtouse/exposure-for-raw-or-for-jpegs

How much does it make sense to further increase the exposure, and how will the overexposed areas change from said increase?

To control the overexposure warning, we’ve added a special feature to version 1.03 of RawDigger, see RawDigger Preferences ->Over/Under Exposure -> Overexposure Detection -> Auto OE Offset.

For instance, for the given image, let's simulate an additional exposure compensation of +1/2 stop during the shot, to do so let’s set a negative shift in the Auto OE Offset field

One of the really cool features of RawDigger is the Auto OE Offset in the preferences which update the Under/Over exposure feedback provided and explained here:

https://www.rawdigger.com/howtouse/exposure-for-raw-or-for-jpegs

What we see is that Frans sunset image is at least 3EV off! By placing that offset, one can now see the updated under exposure readings. IOW, this is what the raw would have been had Frans added 3 EV instead of guessing/assuming from the 'spot on his Z50'. 

Such tools allow photographers who have a desire to understand how their meters work and affect the raw data do so for optimal exposure. Of course, those of us shooting transparency film did this routinely with little of the (massive) fudge factor we see in the Z50 raw supplied.  Exposing (for raw or anything else): Photography 101.  

Tony, you are opening the 16-bit PSD in ACR? I don't know why anyone would but yes, I can do this as well. Yes, I see clipping with the overlays on. But when I select "Open" it opens for me in Elements without the overlay. 

This behavior is the same for me with or without clippings on or off. Do you also see the black was clipped too? As to be expected with the way the image was rendered:

I'm on a Mac. Elements 2023. The version of Adobe Camera Raw it installed (for Elements) is 14.40.

1 hour ago, frans_waterlander said:

I can't do ETTR on the spot because my Z50 doesn't tell me what the maximum values are in the R, G and B sensors. And you can thank Adobe ACR Auto mode for royally blowing out the hightlights.

I understand this is a new hobby so hopefully, these primers on exposure will help:

Articles on exposing for specifically and only raw:
http://www.onezone.photos


http://schewephoto.com/ETTR/

https://luminous-landscape.com/the-optimum-digital-exposure/

http://digitaldog.net/files/ExposeForRaw.pdf

https://www.fastrawviewer.com/blog/mystic-exposure-triangle

https://www.fastrawviewer.com/blog/red_flowers_photography_to-see-the-real-picture

https://www.rawdigger.com/howtouse/exposure-for-raw-or-for-jpegs

https://www.rawdigger.com/howtouse/beware-histogram

https://www.rawdigger.com/howtouse/calibrate-exposure-meter-to-improve-dynamic-range
 

3 minutes ago, frans_waterlander said:

Insult and superiority mode it is.

Insult? Facts: under exposure of your capture (two of us provided the facts), blown highlights you admitted to. I’m sorry I offended you with my facts and common sense.

5 minutes ago, frans_waterlander said:

 I'm done with you, Andrew, this time for good.

Please don't make promises you can't keep. 

1 minute ago, frans_waterlander said:

Nikon decides how much exposure headroom is used. I can't do ETTR on the spot because my Z50 doesn't tell me what the maximum values are in the R, G and B sensors. And you can thank Adobe ACR Auto mode for royally blowing out the hightlights.

Absurd and wrong. On multiple fronts.

You can thank yourself for both suboptimal exposure and blown highlights. To suggest otherwise only further convinces your readers not to take you seriously. 

7 minutes ago, frans_waterlander said:

You don't have my ACR version or my PSE version.

Moot. I don't under expose my captures or clip highlight like you do either. 

16 minutes ago, frans_waterlander said:

I blow out the reds

So, blame ACR Auto.

Sorry, under-exposed images and then sloppy ACR rendering; that's all on you if you've forgotten what you admitted to:

54 minutes ago, frans_waterlander said:

Totally agree with that. My ACR Auto setting makes the overall image look good, but blows out the reds in many areas.

Oh, maybe since as a professional photographer and experienced user of raw converters, including the real ACR, I'm still unable to produce the issues you have reported.