Urgent! Settings without lightmeter

[[godfather]]

I had a shoot this weekend but shoot has bee preponed. now I have to do a shoot tomorrow morning.

I had a plan to buy a light meter but now I have to go without one.

So can anyone please quote me the settings or show me some histogram so I dont get underexposed or over exposed images?

I will be using a vinyl white BG, Elinchrom FX 200 strobes, 53" Octa with Single diffuser.

[GenuineRolla]

CHIMP!

When you view the histogram, it should tell you what parts are blown out (they'll blink). adjust as necessary

[[godfather]]

Yes Yes I know that, but what I want that it should not underexposed. I am not that good at intepreting Hstos. I will also be using my Laptop to see the images directly but my Laptop sceen is very much bright than of my monitor, which may again fool me.

[GenuineRolla]

If you use LightRoom, It allows you to see what parts are underexposed right away by just adjusting the sliders.

[[godfather]]

Great, let me check than.

[TMR Design]

Don't spend too much time trying to interpret histograms. If you have a lot of black content in the frame you will see a lot of information at the left side. If you have a lot of white content you'll have lots of information on the right side. If you're slamming into the right side then you're clipping. If you're slamming into the left side you may or may not be pushing dark areas or areas with shadow into black.

As you know, the histogram does not always tell the whole story but if you have a balanced histogram that is roughly centered then you're in good shape. Some people look for even distribution from left to right but that would only apply to a shot or scene with evenly distributed shadow and highlight and that is quite often not the case. If you see a lot of negative space on the right side then increase exposure but again, keep in mind that the shot may not have bright areas and you don't want to pull the black areas up into gray.

Before you go to this shoot, look at histograms of other images that closely resemble the shots you'll be taking. If they are head shots then look at other head shots. Look at the histogram for the shot and then the facial mask histogram to see how you could be fooled by the whole histogram. Look at shots with black backgrounds or white backgrounds to see how you could be fooled by those histograms as well.

If you have highlight blinkies enabled, be aware that it's a conservative warning. I've done some testing and seen how the highlight warning does not indicate clipping, so do not be afraid of blinkies and do not start pulling the exposure back just because you're seeing a highlight warning. That warning gives you about 1/3 stop to work with before you're actually clipping.

[gonzogolf]

+1 for what Rob wrote.

[ebann]

Here's a nice simple read:

http://www.planetneil.com/tangents/2007/07/31/using-the-histogram-to-determine-exposure/

[Titus213]

And shoot in RAW....more latitude later.

[bobbyz]

If you have a laptop, you can use any of the image editing app which will show you the RGB values. Much better than relaying on what toy visually see on the monitor. And going with numbers you don't have to worry about calibrated monitor or not.

[bobbyz]

One more thing, I wouldbn't go for 255/255/255 unless you want totally nuked bg.

[TMR Design]

One more thing, I wouldbn't go for 255/255/255 unless you want totally nuked bg.

I completely agree. Technically 245-250 is white and retains some detail but 255 is pure white with zero detail.

[m3rdpwr]

I completely agree. Technically 245-250 is white and retains some detail but 255 is pure white with zero detail.

What if I never pay attention to detail, does it matter?! :)

Sorry, I was bored and reading...

-Me :)

[TMR Design]

What if I never pay attention to detail, does it matter?

Just get a G10 and forget about it. :D

[m3rdpwr]

Just get a G10 and forget about it. :D

I bought a G9 and really like it.

Especially since it allows me to use my 580EX's to their full potential if I want to travel light.

However, I find that shutter lag is too great with the G9.

Makes me wish I brought my 40D.

But when I bring my 40D, I wish I brought the lighter G9.

It's a vicious cycle I can't get out of... lol

-Me :)

[Familiaphoto]

I bought a G9 and really like it.

Especially since it allows me to use my 580EX's to their full potential if I want to travel light.

However, I find that shutter lag is too great with the G9.

Makes me wish I brought my 40D.

But when I bring my 40D, I wish I brought the lighter G9.

It's a vicious cycle I can't get out of... lol

-Me :)

Sounds like a trait of Gear Acquisition Syndrome (GAS) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gear_Acquisition_Syndrome). You always want something you don't have. Welcome to Photography.

[m3rdpwr]

Sounds like a trait of Gear Acquisition Syndrome (GAS). You always want something you don't have. Welcome to Photography.

Not really a "Welcome to Photography", just a can't have everything, yet...

-Me

[Familiaphoto]

Not really a "Welcome to Photography", just a can't have everything, yet...

-Me

In the technical sense, true. Just a reminder to the reality that we all want things we don't have. :D

[m3rdpwr]

In the technical sense, true. Just a reminder to the reality that we all want things we don't have. :D

Or in this case, doesn't exist, yet...
(Canon G27, no lag maybe.)

Actually, I think the new Olympus/Pansonic interchangable lens camera's are about as close as we have at the moment...
(DSLR without the SLR kinda. :))

-Mario

[Curtis N]

Before I bought a flash meter, I carried a brand new white t-shirt in the case with my lighting gear. I would drape the shirt over one of the subjects, then shoot and chimp. I would adjust the aperture until the white shirt just barely started to blink on the LCD (overexposure warning).

The point at which a white subject begins to blink on the LCD is dependant on your camera's contrast setting. A blinking area doesn't necessarily mean unrecoverable highlights if you're shooting RAW.

[TMR Design]

Before I bought a flash meter, I carried a brand new white t-shirt in the case with my lighting gear. I would drape the shirt over one of the subjects, then shoot and chimp. I would adjust the aperture until the white shirt just barely started to blink on the LCD (overexposure warning).

The point at which a white subject begins to blink on the LCD is dependant on your camera's contrast setting. A blinking area doesn't necessarily mean unrecoverable highlights if you're shooting RAW.

Right on Curtis. There's a actually a bit of leeway beyond the highlight warning.
One thing I never took the time to figure out was if you shoot RAW, is the highlight warning representing the RAW image or is it representing the JPG preview and all in-camera processing and picture styles?

[[godfather]]

Are these good?

*removed*

[ebann]

Looks good to me. Dark skin and dark hair on white background has good separation.

Remember that shooting to the right (of histogram) does not mean your final print will be as exposed. It's mainly used to preserve detail in the shadow areas without blowing out the white details. You can then safely tweak the final exposure of the print knowing that your details are all there.

[TMR Design]

They look good. 'Perfect' exposure is subjective but those look fine. With faces and head shots make sure you check the facial mask histogram.

[[godfather]]

Thanx for the feedback. I need to ask some questions here.

First, I was using almost the full power of my strobe with 53" octa, I was at 4.8/5.0 Is it normal or I am missing something?

Secondly, lighting looks fine or it looks flat?

[TMR Design]

;8012182']Thanx for the feedback. I need to ask some questions here.

First, I was using almost the full power of my strobe with 53" octa, I was at 4.8/5.0 Is it normal or I am missing something?

Secondly, lighting looks fine or it looks flat?

Hi Aman,

The power level you were using doesn't really tell us much. Power level will be dependent on your setup, distance from the subject and aperture of choice. I just checked the facial mask histograms and they look perfect for the first 2 images and underexposed on the third. The subject's chest and arm are correctly exposed but with the head being further back, it's a bit underexposed. If you're finding that with your setup and aperture that you're always near the top or need more power then that may be an indication that you need a higher power strobe for your main light.

'Flat' is a term that typically refers to lighting that is even from both side or that has little to no contrast. Sometimes that is the intent but most often we try to create some contrast with adult faces. If that is what you mean by 'flat' then I would agree but that is subjective and not what will make or break these images. I would like to see more contrast with the highlights being slightly hotter (brighter) but that too is subjective.

[[godfather]]

Thanx Rob, I just realised not that I was using both the diffusers on the Octa while shooting. I think, as you taught me before, I softened the light and that reduced the contrast. I think I should remember again that to need more contrast I should use only inner baffle.

As far as my FLAT term is related, I meant that do these pics require more impovement in lighting or these are fine?

[Curtis N]

One thing I never took the time to figure out was if you shoot RAW, is the highlight warning representing the RAW image or is it representing the JPG preview and all in-camera processing and picture styles?My experiments seem to indicate that the "blinkies" reflect the JPG preview image, not the RAW data.

[vadim_c]

My experiments seem to indicate that the "blinkies" reflect the JPG preview image, not the RAW data.
If the camera responce function is strictly linear you can rely that you have some slack at the both ends of the histogram. However it is never the case, at least with middle range cameras. In other words the dynamic range at the edges is comressed relatively to the 'sweet spot" of the sensor.

So even if you are able to fix the highlights that blink in the viewfinder my guess is that the quality of the photo will not be the same as with the ideal exposure.
There is a reason why people pay $250 + for a lightmeter.

[ebann]

If the camera responce function is strictly linear you can rely that you have some slack at the both ends of the histogram. However it is never the case, at least with middle range cameras. In other words the dynamic range at the edges is comressed relatively to the 'sweet spot" of the sensor.

So even if you are able to fix the highlights that blink in the viewfinder my guess is that the quality of the photo will not be the same as with the ideal exposure.
There is a reason why people pay $250 + for a lightmeter.

or a few bucks for a grey card. ;)