Metering vs Histogram Question

[R_Fredrick_Smith]

Originally Posted by Mark_Oehler

RFS: you had written that, "ON a give scene all 7 gave different readings." Were all the meters set to meter on the same stop granularity (1/2, 1/3. full)? If so, that seems like in the best case scenerio the meters would have spanned 7/3 (or 2-1/3) stops. That's amazing.

Most modern handheld meters give readings out in 1/10th stop increments. Even mine (an old Minolta IV) give it in 1/10th stop increments. So let's say the target indicates an ideal exposure of f8. You might get these kinds of readings f 4 and 8/10ths, f5.6, f f.6 and 4/10ths, f8, f8 and 3/10s, f8 and 7/10ths, f11. But assuming, they were each just 1/10th different then the next, then that would give you a 7/10th stop range and an assumed best spot somewhere in there. So its not as amazing.

When shooting digital, it is a lot like shooting chrome in the old days. You wanted to be as close to right on for the exposure as you could get. Even being off a 1/3rd of a stop could be bad news in certain cases. Now the meter in the camera is also giving very precise readings (just look at your metadata), but it only lets you make changes in 1/3rd stop increments (for many cameras). But I've seen people off by 2 to 3 stops sometimes. This is usually just a technique problem, of course. But meters need to be calibrated.
Cheers,
rfs

[Mark_Oehler]

My sekonic reports to 1/3 stop (I set it that way to match my cameras). So, all the meters were reporting to .1 stops?

[R_Fredrick_Smith]

Originally Posted by Brennans_Photography

RFS,
Now I'm a little confused. You want the spikes as far right as possible? So, it's the right spike as far right without touching the end, correct? I was trying to put the middle spike in the middle of the histogram, which would move the right spike to the left a little.

Can you explain why you go to the right?

Thanks again!

Pete

Yes. Digital is linear. So the most data is collected in the first stop (1/2 to be exact), and then 1/2 of what left in the next, and so forth (moving left). So further right means more data and more data for the shadows ares because it has been moved further right. Here is one article of many about this subject:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tu...se-right.shtml

And here is one that adds RAW to the discussion:

http://www.digitalphotopro.com/tech/...g-for-raw.html

That's why you may want to even clip highlights, if you know what you're doing. You can recover highlights in RAW, but its not possible to recover shadows, because there just isn't any more data to work with.

Cheers,
rfs

[PhotoDave1]

Originally Posted by Stecyk

Some believe that "exposing to the right" allows you take full advantage of the bits and bytes. That is, more information is contained at the brighter end.

You can read this article which explains it in much greater detail.

http://tinyurl.com/2hebo

So what RFS is doing with his target, which I also use, is two things: 1) setting the color balance (which has nothing to do with exposing to the right), and 2) ensuring that he is getting the best exposure without clipping those parts he doesn't want clipped.

I just read this article and it is incredible. There is a ton of really good information here. Thank you very much for posting it.