Histogram, who uses it?

elrey2375 wrote in post #14562999
There is NO set way a histogram should look, firstly, so you're wrong in that respect. As for not hurting feelings, there's a way to talk to people and there's a way NOT to talk to people. Generally, calling someone a fool falls in the latter category. It shows malice behind your words and what has anyone done to you to deserve it? A histogram should be used to gauge exposure, that's it. There is no perfect histogram because depending on what you want your photo to look like, the histogram will reflect different things. If you're wanting a darker photo, it will be clumped to the left. If it's high key, it will clumped to the right. You have every right to make your point, but calling people fools isn't really necessary.

Calling somebody a fool does not show malice. For example, "a fool and his money are soon parted" shows no malice, nor do the numerous verses in Proverbs show malice. Being called a fool doesn't make one feel good, but they either have 3 options: change themselves, ignore the comment, or change others. Each one comes with a different set of results.

Also, how to use your histogram to obtain the look you want is not in question here, but rather which of the following is better or more wise method to use when determining whether exposure is indeed where you intend it to be:
1) "do you use the exposure meter"
2) "do you use the LCD image review"
3) "do you use the histogram"
4) "do you use blinkies and shoot to the right"
5) "do you use some combination"

Im glad I posted the topic. Theres some good info in this thread. Histogram is still a tad confusing to me... Guess I'll just have to keep reading, shooting, reading, shooting.

Saying something is foolish is not the same as calling someone a fool. Even wise men have foolish ideas and actions.

AAphotog wrote in post #14563056
Im glad I posted the topic. Theres some good info in this thread. Histogram is still a tad confusing to me... Guess I'll just have to keep reading, shooting, reading, shooting.

Please do, the histogram is an inventory of whats in your image. How much bright, middle, dark you have, and lets you know what you are missing. Its not perfect but once you understand the tool it pays off.

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #14561027
I just guess and bracket 'till I'm happy...

This method must have cost you a fortune in film back in the day, Jay. Esp when you first started shooting. Fuji, and Kodak must have really loved you.

(Unless of course you were just one of those gifted photographers who pretty much got the exposure bang on with your first attempt. :lol

TeamSpeed wrote in post #14563043
Calling somebody a fool does not show malice. For example, "a fool and his money are soon parted" shows no malice, nor do the numerous verses in Proverbs show malice. Being called a fool doesn't make one feel good, but they either have 3 options: change themselves, ignore the comment, or change others. Each one comes with a different set of results.

Also, how to use your histogram to obtain the look you want is not in question here, but rather which of the following is better or more wise method to use when determining whether exposure is indeed where you intend it to be:
1) "do you use the exposure meter"
2) "do you use the LCD image review"
3) "do you use the histogram"
4) "do you use blinkies and shoot to the right"
5) "do you use some combination"

Instead of looking at the histogram, how about looking at the ACTUAL photo you're taking. Does it look the way you want it to look or not? You should be able to look at a photo and know what the histogram is going to look like. As for calling someone a fool, don't apologize for him. He said people were fools for not using it. That's not how you talk to people, bottom line.

I noticed that when looking at histograms, it seems that detail clips in the highlights or darks most of the time. (outside shooting in daylight)

gonzogolf wrote in post #14563079
Please do, the histogram is an inventory of whats in your image. How much bright, middle, dark you have, and lets you know what you are missing. Its not perfect but once you understand the tool it pays off.

Can't you look at the photo and see what's missing? A histogram is a fine tool, but it's just that, a tool. You don't need a histogram to tell you that a high-key photo is going to be all slammed up against the right side and vice versa for a dark photo.

AAphotog wrote in post #14563120
I noticed that when looking at histograms, it seems that detail clips in the highlights or darks most of the time. (outside shooting in daylight)

That's because they're not properly exposed. It wouldn't clip in the properly exposed areas.

gonzogolf wrote in post #14563079
Please do, the histogram is an inventory of whats in your image. How much bright, middle, dark you have, and lets you know what you are missing. Its not perfect but once you understand the tool it pays off.

I use the histogram when I first start shooting. It is a tool that I use to correct my shots. Once I find what I am looking for, I don't use it the rest of the time that I am in that location.

elrey2375 wrote in post #14563108
Instead of looking at the histogram, how about looking at the ACTUAL photo you're taking. Does it look the way you want it to look or not? You should be able to look at a photo and know what the histogram is going to look like. As for calling someone a fool, don't apologize for him. He said people were fools for not using it. That's not how you talk to people, bottom line.

Actual photo huh? Where and when does this happen, out in the bright sun, or perhaps in the shade, with the LCD turned up bright, or maybe its adjusted low. Using the histogram takes some of the variable about viewing environment/bias out of the equation.

elrey2375 wrote in post #14562999
There is no perfect histogram because depending on what you want your photo to look like, the histogram will reflect different things.

Another issue is that it is trivial to read a level bubble. But it can be very hard to read a histogram. People who don't feel comfortable trying to let the histogram decide the exposure aren't foolish. We don't call our kids fools just because they haven't learned to read yet. But it is very good to be able to read, so we want everyone to learn. And it's very good to understand histograms, so we want everyone to learn.

It's easier to learn how a histogram works with a camera that can show it live. Then it's possible to underexpose and see the curves that forms the image, and maybe a bar too the right from strong light sources that still clips. So people can see that they can increase the exposure, moving the curve shape closer to the right-hand side.

If just taking a picture, and looking at the histogram, the histogram may have a spike all to the right. But it is hard to know if it hides just the light sources or actual scene content. The user have to guestimate the height of the bar compared to perceived sizes of light sources. Or take the photo again with a lower exposure setting and see if that bar to the right becomes lower while at the same time new curve shapes shows up as the histogram gets scrolled to the left.

With continuous updates of the histogram, it's very quick to step through a couple of exposure times or aperture values and see the changes to the righthand side of the histogram.

What level requires you to do such extra actions, or learn by experience, just to know if the bubble really is centered or if it is a "false" optima?

I fail to see how people can be fools for not using all features of a camera. Some features are there "just because". Some features are very valuable for just some type of photography. And some features requires lots of training to be useful. Some features may be useful but the user just prefers to do it "the traditional" way. Nothing foolish about that.

All that is possible to do on a forum is to inform people about what different features can be used for and what potential advantages/disadvantag​es there may be. In this specific case, the advantages with the histogram + blinking display are very big. But it's an educational thing to make people realize the advantages, and to learn how to actually make use of these features.

Next thing is that it does matter if people shoot raw or jpeg. If shooting raw, we adjust the exposure we want in the actual print at a later time. If shooting jpeg, we often have to make extra compromises directly in the field, since we can't tell the camera what curve adjustments we prefer. So if shooting a low-contrast scene directly to jpeg, adjusting the histogram to the right can end up with a much too light print, even if there are no exposure clipping.

To each his own.

umphotography wrote in post #14562395
Steve

Go out by a medium size photovision calibration disc. It has 3 lines on it. White,grey,black. Put the target so that the black side matches what your camera is telling. Black will face camera left.

Take a test shot and adjust your exposure to where the middle grey is dead bang in the center of your histogram.....exposure will be dead bang on the money. go to photovision and study this. it helped me a ton.

Watch this

http://www.youtube.com​/watch?v=ubHNCCyGqBs

Thanks for your help! I appreciate it. I do have a greay card which helps.

elrey2375 wrote in post #14563121
Can't you look at the photo and see what's missing? A histogram is a fine tool, but it's just that, a tool. You don't need a histogram to tell you that a high-key photo is going to be all slammed up against the right side and vice versa for a dark photo.

No - the quality of the LCD on the camera is often not enough.
And we don't have the time to zoom in to actually start to see the features of the brides dress.
And we can often not control the surrounding light. In glaring sun, it's easy to overexpose light objects. Or losing shadow details. And we can't even see the photo on the display because of all the glare and because the display isn't bright enough.

While the displays on the cameras are getting better, there are still lots and lots and lots to do. But however much that gets done, it will still fail because we don't view the display in a controlled environment unless we have some form of scope frame around the display.

Next thing is that when editing, there are often curves adjustments that changes the scale of different stops of the raw image. These curve adjustments brings up features not visible in the unadjusted photo - and even less visible in the LCD on the camera.

So does metering mode change your histogram? Or if using the histogram correctly, you won't have to Meter at all?