Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Noise

  • 25-03-2009 4:11pm
    #1
    Anouilh
    Registered Users Posts: 1,826 ✭✭✭


    I would find it helpful if the experts here could give some personal comments on whether or not this article gives good advice, please.

    http://visual-vacations.com/Photography/exposure_metering_strategies.htm

    Today, a typical Dublin experience where sun and cloud keep influencing every moment out of doors left me changing ISO at almost a frantic rate.

    Usually I underexpose photos, as less detail seems to be lost.
    I was told in a camera shop that this is not a bad idea,
    but I do wonder if sometimes a little over exposure might not seem
    a bit more dazzling?


Comments

  • #2
    Borderfox
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,263 ✭✭✭✭Borderfox


    My cameras are usually set to overexpose by at least 1/3rd of a stop and up to a full stop over depending on the location. Overexposure kills noise also blows highlights but they are the breaks.


  • #3
    CabanSail
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 9,047 CMod ✭✭✭✭CabanSail


    That site is blocked to me.

    The advice Guy Gowan gives is, when shooting RAW, expose for Shadow Detail & then pull the highlights back in Raw conversion. This is because pulling highlights back doesn't introduce noise like bringing detail out in Shadow. There is a limit but probably best to err onthe side of overexposure if you have a choice.


  • #4
    oshead
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,131 ✭✭✭oshead


    Anouilh wrote: »
    Usually I underexpose photos, as less detail seems to be lost.
    I was told in a camera shop that this is not a bad idea,
    but I do wonder if sometimes a little over exposure might not seem
    a bit more dazzling?

    The stop furthest to the right side of the histogram has the ability to hold the same amount of data than the rest of the image itself. Can I draw your attention to this thread from May of last year.

    Dave OS


  • #5
    Mr. Grieves
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 781 ✭✭✭Mr. Grieves


    oshead wrote: »
    The stop furthest to the right side of the histogram has the ability to hold the same amount of data than the rest of the image itself.

    This is very true, but OP it's good to remember that the next stop to the right again can hold no information whatsoever - I mean that once the highlights are blown, they're not coming back. With care, you can place the brightest part of the scene just to the left of the cutoff point, but it's difficult. Given that the dynamic range of any scene is likely to be greater than that of your sensor, the safest bet imo is to expose for the middle of the range.


  • #6
    Anouilh
    Registered Users Posts: 1,826 ✭✭✭Anouilh


    This is all very helpful. Blown highlights seem to be very often discussed and I've taken to using a CP to deal with Irish skies. Some of the results can be a bit murky, however.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement