Can't get it 'right in camera'

viper_biker

viper_biker

Messages
550
Name
Gareth
Edit My Images
Yes
Recently I've found that I've been relying more and more on Photoshop to rescue my photo's as I've failed to get it right 'in camera'. I can't blame the equipment and even if shooting in manual and using the slider to ensure I have the correct exposure I find that the images are usually over-exposed. I've not changed and EV values and not even fast panning where the light might change.

Here are the original shot and the post-edit one (nothing but a brightness adjustment) just so you can see. I took these 2 days ago at the Belfast Zoo,

Untouched,

DSC_2911.jpg


Auto WB and Auto settings in CS3 RAW editor,

DSC_2911-1.jpg


Could it be that I use and Auto WB, or something else?

EXIF - f5.0
1/100th
ISO200
3D Colour Matrix selected
 
err...that dark background is telling your meter to overexpose slightly...try underexposing by 2/3 stop and take it from there...
I've found that all my Nikons have erred towards overexposure, no matter what mode is selected...
I just shoot manual and start at a 2/3 under almost by default...
 
Your saying you did this in RAW editor... therefore you're shooting RAW correct?

in which case you are always going to need to apply some processing in RAW, unless the software is applying some for you... at least that is my understanding.

Also if you are having to use Auto WB and it's making a big difference then you have your WB set wrong in camera... I'm a begger for this one as I rarely if ever touch the WB setting and I'm sure if I did it would improve my photo's... for example the unprocessed picture seems to have a blueih tinge to the whole picture to me
 
Creed said:
Your saying you did this in RAW editor... therefore you're shooting RAW correct?

in which case you are always going to need to apply some processing in RAW, unless the software is applying some for you... at least that is my understanding.
Click to expand...


Ah yes that too - tick 'Default' not 'Auto' in the RAW dialogue panel when it comes up...
 
The first shot was 'As Shot' for the WB and 'Default' on the additional settings.

The second shot was 'Auto' for the WB and 'Auto' on the additional settings.

I have only recently started to shoot in RAW as I've found that its a lot easier to work with (even with my limited CS3 ability) Could it be as simple as that there is no 'in camera' editing of the image going on and its left down to me to point the image in the right direction?
 
viper_biker said:
The first shot was 'As Shot' for the WB and 'Default' on the additional settings.

The second shot was 'Auto' for the WB and 'Auto' on the additional settings.

I have only recently started to shoot in RAW as I've found that its a lot easier to work with (even with my limited CS3 ability) Could it be as simple as that there is no 'in camera' editing of the image going on and its left down to me to point the image in the right direction?
Click to expand...

Think that might be it, the camera will not do anything to the RAW file although I believe that some RAW software will apply the settings that were specified in camera to the raw file when you open it as a default but I might be wrong there
 
There will be whatever 'in-camera' editing that you specify in the menu setup...sharpening, colour space etc is all customisable...
 
Arkady said:
There will be whatever 'in-camera' editing that you specify in the menu setup...sharpening, colour space etc is all customisable...
Click to expand...

Thought that only applied to the JPG not the Raw... I was under the impression any sharpening, saturation etc in the camera menus was not applied to RAW files
 
D300,s shoot (hot) so dial in minus 0.7 in your exposure compensation that should help too:thumbs:
 
as your using a d300, and i assume ACR, have you tried applying any of the nikon camera profiles?
There is not really a thing as an untouched raw file, has to be converted (touched) to make it viewable. if the 'default' is not giving you the right results then try adding a preset as a new starting point.
As for getting it right in camera, there are a million topics on the web and the d300 'overexposing' all shots. Think its really about totally understanding the connection between the exposure and focus points in cam.
 
Creed said:
Thought that only applied to the JPG not the Raw... I was under the impression any sharpening, saturation etc in the camera menus was not applied to RAW files
Click to expand...

I thought (and I may be wrong, so don't quote me here) that the in-camera settings were applied to the RAW image (or the JPEG thumbnail) on opening, but were all undo-able in RAW converter - i.e. the image that opens has all those in-camera settings applied, but you can alter or undo all of them.
 
Arkady said:
I thought (and I may be wrong, so don't quote me here) that the in-camera settings were applied to the RAW image (or the JPEG thumbnail) on opening, but were all undo-able in RAW converter - i.e. the image that opens has all those in-camera settings applied, but you can alter or undo all of them.
Click to expand...

Ah sorry I see, this is what I was trying to get at, I think that is down to the software you use... I 'Think' what happens is the software reads the settings and applys them to the RAW file for you so that it looks like the JPEG thumbnail. But the camera itself only applies them to the thumbnail. So if you are using software that doesn't do this you get a completely unprocessed image.
 
Arkady said:
err...that dark background is telling your meter to overexpose slightly...try underexposing by 2/3 stop and take it from there...
I've found that all my Nikons have erred towards overexposure, no matter what mode is selected...
I just shoot manual and start at a 2/3 under almost by default...
Click to expand...

sorry mate didnt read all you,re post :bonk:
 
dinorock said:
D300,s shoot (hot) so dial in minus 0.7 in your exposure compensation that should help too:thumbs:
Click to expand...

I think you're saying the D300 tends to over-expose, so dial in -0.7 to compensate... ;)

If so, I concur.

I'm at the stage where I feel I'm starting to get to grips with exposure. I'm not entirely sure why, but I'm getting better results straight out of the camera than I used to. I imagine it's somewhere between knowing my D300 quite well now and better judgement of the light at my disposal, particularly when shooting manually :)
 
Arkady said:
I thought (and I may be wrong, so don't quote me here) that the in-camera settings were applied to the RAW image (or the JPEG thumbnail) on opening, but were all undo-able in RAW converter - i.e. the image that opens has all those in-camera settings applied, but you can alter or undo all of them.
Click to expand...

sorry lol, i am quoting you.

yes it does, but for about 1/2 a second until the raw conversion software has applied its own settings.
 
another good way to check is to look at the histogram if all the peaks are over to the left its probably under exposed :thumbs:

if you hav,nt deleted it from your card yet check it in camera
 
anyway
Regardless of what's causing it - the fact is that the images are over-exposed. So - it's an exposure problem at the outset; the easiest way to solve it is to alter the exposure so the images do appear correct at the time of capture - either shoot manual and under-expose, or apply -0.7 exposure compensation to all you images by default.
 
Thanks for all you help. I'm going to try the -0.7 exposure compensation as rather than intentionally underexposing time-in, time-out, the -0.7EV will do that for me.

Thanks for all your help.
 
this is the 'easy' work around. Far from the solution.
The d300 has a great metering system that does not overexpose every picture by 0.7 ev.
 
munchycarrot said:
this is the 'easy' work around. Far from the solution.
The d300 has a great metering system that does not overexpose every picture by 0.7 ev.
Click to expand...

Au contraire Blackadder - I've found every Nikon I've ever used has overexposed by about 2/3 stop - from the D1 right through to the new D3x I got last week...
I therefore routinely underexpose by this amount...
 
Arkady said:
Au contraire Blackadder - I've found every Nikon I've ever used has overexposed by about 2/3 stop - from the D1 right through to the new D3x I got last week...
I therefore routinely underexpose by this amount...
Click to expand...

me to:shrug:
 
Just did a test on a few settings, RAW, JPeg, Exposure Compensation.

Left - RAW, no compensation, Right - Raw with -0.7 compensation,

DSC_2963-1.jpg
DSC_2964-1.jpg


Left - JPeg, no compensation, Right - JPeg with -0.7 compensation,

DSC_2965.jpg
DSC_2966.jpg
 
Better on the right - gives you plenty to work with, even though the ones on the left would be 'technically' right at about 17% grey...

A bit of a cheat using a subject that is almost a uniform grey though...lol
 
Your second look fine considering the flat grey subject you've chosen ...the first is odd though, I find it looks underexposed but also looks like you've shot it through a window or something.

Try a subject with more contrast for a test I reckon.:thumbs:

Arkady said:
Au contraire Blackadder - I've found every Nikon I've ever used has overexposed by about 2/3 stop - from the D1 right through to the new D3x I got last week...
I therefore routinely underexpose by this amount...
Click to expand...

:thumbs:

Me three.
 
Anyway why is this just an exposure problem... post the first picture with just the exposure altered and I reckon it will still look off... there was obviously a white balance issue as well...

And I'm not saying they dont, but if Nikons are always overexposing why not report it to Nikon and then buy a canon? :) :coat:
 
Thread cleaned. Please leave attitudes, egos, and any anger at the door along with the slippers.
 
I do...and adjust the exposure accordingly: what part of that do you not understand?

If after many years of experience the same thing happens every time, then dialling in an EV adjustment is the correct thing to do...
 
I didn't say I didn't understand it - and and didn't say I don't do it. What I did say (maybe badly) was you need to think about it for each shot. I have some shots where it works fine, but I've also others where it would of lead me to bad under exsposures

Hugh
 
...and I do think about it for each shot...and I've been thinking about it for each shot for so many years that it became apparent that it was a consistant metering error for the type of work I do...

Herro?
 
interestingly, ive found the d2 series (d2x and d2h) always underexpose by 2/3. i used both for probably 60-70,000 shots and ive nearly always had +0.3 dialed in when outdoors. obviously after using a camera for a while you'll get to understand if and when it'll meter a bit incorrectly.

the d1's (d100, d1x) ive owned always overexposed.

neither of which have ever been a problem because ive always been careful with exposure anyway.
 
Arkady said:
I thought (and I may be wrong, so don't quote me here) that the in-camera settings were applied to the RAW image (or the JPEG thumbnail) on opening, but were all undo-able in RAW converter - i.e. the image that opens has all those in-camera settings applied, but you can alter or undo all of them.
Click to expand...
Correct the setting are tagged to the file but you don’t have to use them but can be a starting point but I do not think Sharpening is applied so you have to do this yourself
 
Chaz Photos said:
Correct the setting are tagged to the file but you don’t have to use them but can be a starting point but I do not think Sharpening is applied so you have to do this yourself
Click to expand...

That's the one thing I turn off in-camera and do all in PS...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top