- Here is where you can comment and ask questions about
- The Optimum Digital Exposure Book
- And Post Questions and Comments for me to answer
Click Here to go to OneZone Support page.
The Optimum Digital Exposure
The Optimum Digital Exposure
Click Here to go to OneZone Support page.
Hi Bob
brilliant book, putting the theory in to practice and so far it is great! will need to refine my technique and gain a greater understanding but the theory is solid
Many many thanks
John
[Reply]
Simply “Brilliant” is most appropriate verb for your research and fact findings with ETTR. Thank YOU!
[Reply]
Bob DiNatale Reply:
February 22nd, 2015 at 11:42 am
Lynn,
Thank you for the kind words.
Bob
[Reply]
Hi
I’ve done the tests you described in your e-book with my Pentax 1 degree spotmeter. I get blown highlight at 3 2/3 overexposure with my D800E and 3 stops with 645D. I have conducted similar tests coming from the “Zone System” and “Beyond The Zone System” My dilemma is, I still have 2 more stops to recover with Lightroom “Highlights” slider. Should I further overexpose having this “Highlights” recovery in mind?
Bulent Ozgoren
[Reply]
Bob DiNatale Reply:
January 16th, 2015 at 11:28 am
Bulent
I am assuming you have:
1. run the exposure test by metering the white target with your Pentax spot meter then increasing 16 subsequent exposures by +1/3 until you’ve reached 5+ stops, then
2. viewed these exposures in Lightroom and found the 99% brightness [OWP] to be:
. a) +3 2/3 stops on your D800E and
. b) +3 stops with your 645D.
BTW, these [OWP] seem rather low to me… I would expect both to be around +4 or +4 1/3 stops… Please confirm that jewelry and the test.
I have conducted similar tests coming from the “Zone System” and “Beyond The Zone System”
I am not familiar with either of these instructions but I would not try to compare any “Zone System” exposure concepts to Optimizing your digital exposure. My experience with digital “Zone System” approaches is they usually address exposure when processing your file.
My dilemma is, I still have 2 more stops to recover with Lightroom “Highlights” slider. Should I further overexpose having this “Highlights” recovery in mind?
If you correctly found the Optimum White Point [OWP], then you should not have “two more stops to recover with Lightroom “Highlights” slider.” When you first look at your exposure in Lightroom, it is not uncommon to see a bright exposure with “red clipping” highlights. Most of them will be will go away when adjusting your “Exposure” slider… and then further remove any “red clipping” using the “Highlight” slider.
Another possible reason would be you are not spot metering the brightest area in the scene that you want to be white in your capture… that is why I suggest with the “OneZone method number one” two still bracket plus and -1/3 stops.
Let me know how you are making out. If you would like to send me some example exposures, I can send you a link to place them in the “OneZone_Users” dropbox folder.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Bob
[Reply]
Hi,
I purchased the pdf and have studied it on the way back from a great photo/nature trip in the Indian Ocean. In thinking of the photos I took on that trip (many of animals)–I am not sure that the autobracketing will work with a moving subject. You do reference this indirectly in the book but it seems all the examples are of people who can be told not to move while autobracketing takes place. When I am shooting most birds or mammals I am not shooting portraits so they usually move a bit. Any thoughts on this are greatly appreciated. It is certainly enlightening to note that I can concentrate on exposing for the highlight to improve all photographs–the only question is how to implement with moving subjects–perhaps there is a way to do a proximate reading?
[Reply]
Bob DiNatale Reply:
December 11th, 2014 at 4:02 pm
Andy,
This is the exact purpose for Method #2 “ The modified OneZone Method #2 is more practical… shooting situations with very little setup time and/or subject matter that moves too fast for spot metering.”
The only consideration might be the speed of the bracketed burst. If the burst speed is set at 6 frames per second or higher there will be very little change in movement of the subject within the brackets. Matter of fact, I sometimes change my burst rate to 3FPS just so I could get a different expression when shooting the bracket set.
I dare say a few of my grandchildren might move a little faster than some of those animals you are photographing 🙂
Bob
[Reply]
Hi Bob
I found it curious that in your empirical test for using the (in camera) spot meter you found OWP at EV +4, but that you find +1-1/3 using multi-metering is usually in the neighborhood of OWP. Any thoughts on this?
[Reply]
Bob DiNatale Reply:
December 11th, 2014 at 2:39 pm
Dale,
These are two different exposure approaches thus Method #1 and Method #2.
Method #1
The Optimum White Point (OWP) is absolute. The OWP is found by increasing the exposure by 1/3 stop and see how much exposure it took to reach the Optimum White Point.
Method #2
This is more of the “shotgun” approach with fast-moving subjects are quick moving scenes that do not allow enough time to spot metering a subject. The Method#2 approach is to utilize the cameras multi-metering recommended exposure add 1 1/3 stops exposure to that then bracket +/- 2/3 of a stop… and get on to the next scene. The resulting bracket set ranges from an exposure of +2/3 to +2 stops over the recommended multi-metering exposure. This will not result in the Optimum White Point, however one of the three brackets using Method #2 will be “the most optimum”.
This is a pretty safe recommendation because you will encounter very few scenes that will be overexposed at +2/3 of a stop.
Hope that makes sense,
Bob
[Reply]
Bob,
Just wanted to let you know that I ordered a copy of your book from Amazon when I found it available last Saturday. Took delivery yesterday and I see no problems with the printing of the book. Looking forward to giving your process a try this weekend.
George
[Reply]
Bob DiNatale Reply:
November 20th, 2014 at 10:23 am
George,
Thanks for the update. That is good news.
Just talked with CreateSpace/Amazon yesterday and they feel everything is back on track. They are sending me a few books to “satisfy” ASAP… Should get them by Monday.
Thanks again, Bob
[Reply]
I talked to Sony here and they said bracket at manual mode does work.
[Reply]
Bob DiNatale Reply:
November 20th, 2014 at 10:20 am
mtakeda,
I am glad you found your answer.
Bob
[Reply]
sorry, I honestly do not know … I have set shutter time, aperture, auto bracketing and auto ISO in manual mode and I saved in my memory recall # 2 … in my camera everything works in this way …
[Reply]
Bob DiNatale Reply:
November 20th, 2014 at 10:20 am
Antonio,
Not a problem, it seems that mtakeda has found an answer.
Thanks, Bob
[Reply]
Hello Bob,
I took some relatively low light, high ISO test shots today, and the results are, in a word, AMAZING!! Take a look at this screen shot: https://db.tt/t4j9k1yN.
On my D7000, I set EC to 1.3 EV, and then took a three-shot bracket at 0/-/+ 0.7 at ISO 1600, which yielded exposures at +1.3, +0.7, +2.0 EV. As expected, the histogram on the back of the camera indicated these shots were overexposed, some severely so (lots of blinkies). I processed the +2.0 EV overexposed image in LR (left image in the screen shot).
I then took single shots at ISO 200, 400, 800 and 1600 at exposures indicated by the camera meter (middle and right images in the screen shot). The histogram on the back of the camera indicated each of these shots were “properly” exposed (no blinkies). As it turns out, it wasn’t even a fair fight! The ETTR ISO 1600 shot has less grain and better sharpness than the ISO 400 camera-metered shot, and comparable grain to the ISO 200 camera-metered shot.
This has given me three stops better ISO performance. I loaded these settings into my U1 user settings, and can easily switch to them when appropriate. I am now officially a TODE convert!!
Regards,
Ralph
[Reply]
Bob DiNatale Reply:
November 17th, 2014 at 3:16 pm
Ralph,
“The ETTR ISO 1600 shot has less grain and better sharpness than the ISO 400 camera-metered shot, and comparable grain to the ISO 200 camera-metered shot. This has given me three stops better ISO performance!”
I’m so glad you a pleased with the results.
There is such a wide range of responses to my Luminous Landscape article… Everybody wants to weigh in as to “why it can or cannot work” or “why it should or should not work“… blah blah blah blah! I don’t know why they just don’t try as you did.
I am not a magician expounding black magic… Just a reporter of what I found empirically.
Maybe we should start a TODE club!
Thank you
Bob
[Reply]
I would like to make correction as my auro ISO setting was at max.6400. Now I changed it to 12800 and the test shots indicated 10000 ISO for the max exposure (+0.7) . I do not feel two comfortable at this high iso. This is at the aperture priority. I am still not clear if I am able to use bracketing at the manual setting.
[Reply]
Bob DiNatale Reply:
November 17th, 2014 at 2:47 pm
Antonio,
Any thoughts on this Sony question?
Thanks, Bob
[Reply]
Dear Antonio,
Thank you for advice. I tried the setting you suggested. The problem I had was that it took three shots but ISO number did not change. I tried a few different shutter speed while fixing the aperture at f8 under manual mode. What did I do wrong?
[Reply]
I took the liberty to answer ’cause I use the same camera ..
[Reply]
Bob DiNatale Reply:
November 17th, 2014 at 3:03 pm
Antonio.
Thank you very much for answering. I’m glad you can help us.
Bob
[Reply]
mtakeda.
-set the comp. dial: +1 1/3
-set drive mode: BRK C (continuous) 0.7 EV3
-seto ISO: AUTO
now you can set the shutter speed and aperture that you prefer and when you release the shutter the camera make three consecutive exposures each at 2/3 of stop…I.E.: +2/3…+1 1/3…+2…changing only the ISO; I had saved this setting at my #2 memory recall…
[Reply]
Bob DiNatale Reply:
November 15th, 2014 at 1:31 pm
Antonio,
Thanks for jumping in and using the power of the web.
Bob
[Reply]
Thank you. Yes I bought your book. My problem with A7R at manual mode I can not set up the method 2 unless I manually increase the center exposure to 1 2/3. I feel it is great incoveniences.
[Reply]
I found I am unable to use the exposure compensation under manual mode. Also Auto ISO jacks up ISO well over 1000. The camera is Sony A7R. Am I missing something here?
I would appreciate comments.
[Reply]
Bob DiNatale Reply:
November 14th, 2014 at 1:29 pm
Let me do some research on your Sony a seven are this and I’ll get back to you.
You should not be afraid to go well over 1000. If you bought my book you would see two photos that I took at 10,000 ISO
Click on this link http://onezone.photos/book-photos/ and look at the photos in section 7. The 2nd and 3rd photos were shot at 10,000 ISO.
The idea of using my method is to keep you from fearing using higher ISOs. The noise when you have optimum exposure is greatly minimized.
[Reply]
it is the same…I prefer to set the shutter speed that allow sharp images and the aperture that I think it is the best for the lens in use (always from 4 to 8) or the stop that allow some DOF and let the camera choosing the iso…
[Reply]
Bob DiNatale Reply:
November 10th, 2014 at 1:23 pm
Antonio,
This is a good approach… Especially using the OneZone method #2. Letting the camera choose the ISO with your base exposure being +1.3 EV the noise effect of the ISO is minimized.
Bob
[Reply]
Thanks for the PDF. I’d already resolved that you deserved the $10 just for your inspiration. I spent all afternoon playing with my 5D ii settings, discovering how much information I’d been discarding. The theory was not new, nor ETTR, nor radical ACR adjustments. But your lucid argument for taking RAW way beyond the review screen was compelling.
[Reply]
Bob DiNatale Reply:
November 10th, 2014 at 1:15 pm
Duncan,
Again, I thank you for your wonderful comments.
I especially like the fact that “The theory was not new, nor ETTR, nor radical ACR adjustments.” In a strange way, it validates my entire premise… It is a simple methodology that works with any camera, any chip, any… Any.. well any camera!
Case in point… This weekend I had an opportunity to experience the Lytro Illum camera… Have you seen it? Hmmm, it looks like a fun place to explore. This is a camera that takes light field. Check out this link
Well, you know I had a test out my OneZone method and… of course it works because “The theory is not new, nor radical adjustments”… Just an empirical! An analytic approach to apply to an empirical test… Whether on a Foveon chip or the Lytro camera! When I install the Lytro software I will put the Lytro OneZone exposures on my site… It’s a gas.
From coast-to-coast,
Bob
[Reply]
Bob,
I use a Sony A7R, but in manual mode I’m able to set every shutter speed and stop…the camera only choose the ISO…
[Reply]
Bob DiNatale Reply:
November 7th, 2014 at 1:51 pm
Antonio,
You are able to set every shutter speed and stopped in all other modes also. Think of it this way:
> In the Shutter Speed mode, after you select your shutter speed… You can control your f-stop.
>In the Aperture mode, after you select the aperture… You control the shutter speed.
Unless I am doing still life or rows of flowers, I always shoot wide open… The largest aperture. This ensures that I’m shooting at the highest shutter speed (which is very important for me to get sharp photos) . Now, when I place my exposure value to a + 1.3 EV and shoot my OneZone bracket set + or – 2/3 stops) I know I am shooting at the highest shutter speed the scene allows and still get my 3 brackets of exposure.
For others reading this, my next statement may be heresy… I also set my ISO on “Auto”. Yes that’s right, I let the camera choose the ISO that will give me the preferred shutter speed. I’d rather have a sharp noisy image than no noise in an image with too much movement.
I think I am successful with this in many cases because shooting the ISO higher at a more optimal exposure gives me the same grain as 2 ISOs lower at an EV 0.
I want all who seem doubtful to reread this. If you still doubtful, I would implore you to try it.
The Empirical Guy,
Bob
[Reply]
hi, since I believe that shooting free hand it is better to not go below 1/250, using the method 2 I prefer to use the manual mode with auto ISO, because in such manner only changes the sensitivity, while with aperture priority the shooter time it chooses by the camera … what do you think?
[Reply]
Bob DiNatale Reply:
November 5th, 2014 at 8:16 pm
Antonio,
What kind of camera are you using? Are you able to set a minimum shutter speed of 1/250th?
Bob
[Reply]
when is the kindle version going to be available?
[Reply]
Bob DiNatale Reply:
November 3rd, 2014 at 2:54 pm
Nick,
By the end of the week or sooner.
Bob
[Reply]
Dear Mr. DiNatale,
Thanks for your LuLa article. As a relative novice, I have some work to do both understanding the theory and applying it my Panasonic GX7. I also need to look carefully at your book. Does your approach it work with other raw processing software beside LR _eg Capture One 7 or 8 or just LR?
Thank you.
Frank Stark
[Reply]
Bob DiNatale Reply:
November 2nd, 2014 at 12:43 am
training:
Frank,
Using the OneZone has relatively simple demands. It will work with any raw capture software. Two main requirements are:
1) shows %brightness and when you hover over an area with your mouse and
2) has “highlight clipping That warnings.
I am very familiar with the lightroom workflow has a stacking feature that Auto Stack images in groups by time… a feature that is very helpful when using the OneZone.
If other raw processing software beside (eg Capture One 7 or 8) has a stacking features this is a bonus.
Bob
[Reply]
a very useful article. I visited my son and his family xmas 2013. When I arrived I discovered the LCD on my om-d em-5 was cracked, useless, but the camera operated normally. Took the kids out skiing at a local hill, my workflow was all messed up and I took several pictures before I realized my iso was set at 25600 !! bright Utah sun, early afternoon, on snow. When I brought the pictures into LR I dragged the exposure slider all the way down and recovered the pictures, except for the snow of course. Although shadows could still be seen in the snow. amazing what the sensor and software can do.
[Reply]
Bob DiNatale Reply:
November 1st, 2014 at 11:42 pm
It sure is!
[Reply]
Bob – Thanks for the answer. You sort of make my point. I am using the latest version of LR (5.6) and the point is that increasing exposure in the camera and then decreasing it in LR are not equivalent. In my limited experience, primarily Nikon cameras, increasing exposure in the digital camera is a nearly linear adjustment within normal ranges, whereas the adjustment slider in LR is definitely not linear. As you say, it’s adaptive. Just watch the ends of the histogram as you make exposure slider adjustments. The exposure slider is actually a mid-tone slider; its effect tapers off at both ends. Yes, I can recover the original contrast and saturation with additional slider tweaks and/or curves, but I think it’s a bit more complicated than just increase the exposure in camera and decrease in post using the exposure slider. Thanks for the interesting discussion.
[Reply]
Bob,
Are you and Ctein pretty much in agreement or is there a difference of opinions? ( I respect you both for advancing the art of photography ) See article minus examples below with the link included.
Thank You!
Bruce Bodine
“Expose to the right” is a rule that asserts that to get the best quality in your digital photographs, you should push your exposure as far to the high side (the right side of the histogram) as you can without clipping the highlights.
Once upon a time, this rule made a certain amount of sense, although not as much as its proponents ever claimed. Once upon a time, digital cameras were pretty noisy beasts, and suppressing that image noise was one of the more important ways to improve image quality. Increasing exposure increases the number of photons counted, which improves accounting statistics. Hence, reduced noise. If you can do this without clipping highlights, it’s a win.
These days, noise is really not a big source of image quality loss, unless you’re that particular kind of photo-fetishist (see “The Photo-Fetishistic League”). Cameras and sensors are so much better. Clipped highlights, as Mike and I discussed last week, haven’t gone away. It’s still a big issue when trying to get real quality in a digital photograph.
The thing is, digital behaves like slide film—slide film with a really, really sharp toe. The toe of the film curve is low in contrast, so there is not a hugely abrupt transition from no detail in the highlights to a little detail. Digital is abrupt. When you hit the wall, you know you’ve hit the wall.
The worst thing you could do with a slide film was to blow out the highlights. Many professionals routinely underexposed their slide film to avoid this. Pictorially, the results weren’t as great, but you could fix that in printing and reproduction. You couldn’t fix blown highlights.
In theory, you can still use the dubious right-hand rule. Just be careful to never blow out any pixels. In practice, much easier said than done. Histograms and camera-back displays are only an approximation of what’s actually in the file. Even when they aren’t, highlights are frequently small enough regions of the photograph that they don’t contain a statistically significant number of pixels. You may not even notice them in a histogram, and on that little screen on the back of the camera that shows you maybe one pixel in ten, highlight warnings may not show.
Blog209figure11. The original photograph was underexposed by more than a stop to maximize the amount of highlight detail it held. A straight conversion in ACR, unsurprisingly, looks quite underexposed.
Blog209figure22. For the sake of clarity in illustration, I’ve converted illustration 1 to black-and-white in ACR so that color doesn’t distract from the important discussion.
Unless you’re sure you’re dealing with a low contrast subject, pushing your exposure to the high side makes it likely you’ll blow highlights. If you’re trying to improve your odds of getting a good exposure, pulling away from the right is a much smarter thing to do. If you know your subject is really high in contrast, pull far, far away from the right. Keep those highlights under control and let the shadows go where they may.
Of course, if you don’t take steps to correct the tonal placement when you process your file, it’ll look lousy. It’ll be very dark, with middle-tones that look more like charcoal. Not a pretty sight. Kind of like illustrations 1 and 2.
This photograph was substantially underexposed to ensure that the highlights didn’t blow out. Illustration 2 is just a desaturated version of illustration 1, because it’s easier to see what I’m talking about without the confounding effects of color. Don’t think this is just about black-and-white, though; blown out highlights are at least as annoying in a color photograph. Nighttime scenes like the one shown are especially high in contrast, which is why I’m using this as an illustration for the article, but the rules apply equally to normal daytime photography. This is not a special technique to be used in unusual circumstances; it should be your normal way of working.
Blog209figure3
3. Even with underexposure, there are some blown highlights, shown in red.
Even with this underexposure, there are some blown-out highlights. Illustration 3 is a screenshot from ACR with the highlight warning (bright red) turned on. In a really contrasty scene or one with glaring or specular highlights, something is likely to blow out, no matter what the exposure range of your film or sensor it is. Underexposing minimizes but doesn’t always eliminate that. We can deal.
Blog209figure44. The straight-line curve and the accompanying histogram on the left are from the default conversion in ACR. The curve and histogram on the right are my custom conversion designed to compensate for the underexposure in illustration 1 and 2.
The left side of figure 4 shows the characteristic curve in ACR that I used to get illustrations 1 and 2. It’s my standard default ACR setting. Below it is a histogram for illustration 2. Notice how everything is piled up near the shadow end, far from the right side. Overall, way too dark. To fix that, I used a curve setting like that on the right side of figure 4. It produces the histogram below that curve, and illustration 5 shows what the picture looks like with that curve applied.
Blog209figure55. The same photograph as converted with a custom curve. Good tonality, good shadow separation, and no harsh highlight transitions.
That curve has three major benefits. Obviously, it restores the overall tonality of the photograph to something normal without adding more blown highlights. Next, it produces good contrast and separation in the shadows, where it is hard for the human eye to see tonal differences. We see shadow differentiation in prints poorly, so some extra contrast down there is a good thing.
The third benefit, and it’s a huge one, is the rolloff in the shoulder of the curve, lowering highlight contrast. That means that what blown highlights are left don’t jump out as harsh white blotches; the highlight detail just gradually fades out into white, the same way it does in a well-made darkroom print.
If you really can’t stand the idea of any additional noise in your photographs, run a noise reduction plug-in on the image. You won’t need a very strong setting; the noise difference between a normally exposed and an underexposed digital photograph is not all that great. Just a whisper of noise reduction will take the noise level down to where it would have been if you’d exposed normally or even to the right.
Just, whatever you do, don’t expose to the right unless you’re absolutely positive there are no highlights to get blown. It was a questionable rule to begin with; these days I call it downright dangerous.
Ctein
Taken from TOP website: http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2011/10/expose-to-the-right-is-a-bunch-of-bull.html
[Reply]
Just read your piece on LuLa and I have one question concerning processing “optimally exposed” image in Lightroom. I find that when I reduce the exposure in LR using the exposure slider, it also greatly increases the contrast, which I don’t necessarily want. Example, I have a low-contrast subject that’s mostly med. grays. I bump the exposure up in camera to get an optimum image capture. In post, in LR, I attempt to reduce the exposure to make the image again med. gray. I find that both the contrast and the saturation have changed with cranking the exposure slider down by several stops. How do you process these images?
[Reply]
Bob DiNatale Reply:
October 30th, 2014 at 10:02 pm
BJohnson
Many thoughts here… What version Lightroom a you using? If it’s not at least Lightroom 4 (which uses process version 2012) – stop what you’re doing in upgrade… there ias a whole world waiting for you out there.
Lightroom 4 (and higher), uses process version 2012, an adaptive technology which moderates the contrast buildup you’re describing.
Assuming you are using Lightroom 4 or above, try using after using the “Shadow” slider try using the “Tone Curve” (in the non-Pint mode) and use the “Dark” & “Shadows” sliders.
Again, here is where you will benefit from the optimum digital exposure… You can increase the range of your adjustments without getting any processing artifacts.
I look forward to hearing your results.
[Reply]
Hi, I sent you e mail question yesterday and today I did 1.3, +.7 and -.7 and found even at +2.0 the hilight is still not blown. It is eye opening and amazing to say the least. Now I am onto the testing it by using the spot meter. I assume I will measure the brightest spot and open up the exposure by three or four spot? Is ths what you said on your article?
Thank you for your article.
[Reply]
Bob DiNatale Reply:
October 30th, 2014 at 9:42 pm
Mtakeda
I’m not surprised that you exposed was two stops and still did not see any blown out highlights. As I said in the article, if you have a bright scene the meter is fooled and will actually drive the metered exposure darker. In such cases even +2 stops does not reach the right side of the histogram.
When you meet in the bright part of the scene you cannot arbitrarily open up 3 to 4 stops. You must “apply an exposure bias” which you can find by testing. I explain this test in my book… But it is not very complicated. You simply meter a white card and keep increasing the exposure until the brightness in your software is 99+%. Whatever the +EV exposure got the white card to 99+% brightness is your “exposure bias” (Optimum White Point). This “exposure bias” (Optimum White Point) needs to be applied to your exposures meter reading.
Sounds like a mouthful but if you think it through it is pretty simple.
Thaks for your thoughts
[Reply]
Hello,
The article is very interesting, thank you for it. I made a test with two cameras about ETTR.
http://mattihartikainen.net/about-exposing-to-the-right-ettr-with-sony-dsc-r1-and-olympus-om-d/
The results were really impressive. The other camera in my test was Olympus OM-D E-M5. It has a metering system, which shows warning colors in the areas of over- and underexposure in the viewfinder. The warnings are based on the raw data in the camera. The warnings in the camera work 1:1 with Lightroom warnings. Only Olympus Pen and OM-D cameras have this excellent measuring possibility (as far as I know).
Matti Hartikainen
[Reply]
Bob DiNatale Reply:
October 30th, 2014 at 11:30 am
Matti,
Nice blog… And wonderful photographs.
I’m glad our results concur.
Have you seen Bruce Frasers white paper on “Raw Capture, Linear Gamma,
and Exposure”?. He summed it all up in 4 pages!
http://wwwimages.adobe.com/www.adobe.com/content/dam/Adobe/en/products/photoshop/pdfs/linear_gamma.pdf
[Reply]