Rebel XT, TV mode, overexposure?

I got a Rebel XT that I use primarily for skydiving photography. I had to re-learn some high school photography theory but eventually started shooting in TV mode @ 400, ISO 100, which usually results in f/8 or so during good daylight (I'm using kit lens, 18-55). I was taking pictures that I thought were pretty good for a couple months (I even got 3rd place in a skydiving photo competition!) I received an email from an old friend who was looking at that page and noticed all my entries (look down near the bottom at the "runners up", there are over 20 entries by Matt Hoover). My friend said that looking at my entries, he thought they were all a bit overexposed, and that in his opinion and experience with these cameras, that the XT and the 20D metering system always overexposes a bit, and when he uses his XT in TV mode (as I do), he uses exposure compensation @ -2/3.

I learned a bit about histograms on his advice, and examined the EXIF data of my older shots to see the histograms. They didn't seem too bad from the way I understand they are supposed to be read (too much data bunched up at one end of the spectrum, all the way left or all the way right, means under or overexposed, right?). But I admittedly don't know a whole lot about photography, so I figured I'd take his advice for a test run and see how I like the results, especially since he seemed to know his stuff. I took a some shots last weekend with the EC @ -2/3 and in my opinion they all look a bit dark. He said if they did turn out underexposed that they could always be fixed in post, whereas overexposure you are stuck with. The pictures that looked too dark, I tried to fix them in post but couldn't get them to look right. Perhaps my Photoshop skills just aren't up to snuff. All I really know how to do is play with the levels, contrast, and saturation.
So I guess my question is 2-fold.

1) Has anybody else ever heard the theory that the XT and 20D metering consistently overexposes? Should I be using the EC @ -2/3?

2) Is the attached picture (taken @ -2/3 EC, unlike all the others on that external link which are @ 0) simply underexposed or something more complicated? Is there any way to make the jumper more visible? He was looking right at me and I really wanted that to be visible, but anything I do to make his face visible makes the rest of the picture too washed out.

Edited to add attachment..

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Never heard the idea that the XT and 20D are underexposing. Never had problem with mine. Although is known fact that the 300d is underexposing. I think your friend is wrong here.
Looking at your shot, it's easy to tell the underexposure. Brought it to PS and no surprise, the histogram is empty to the right side. Those clouds should have been white.

To lighten up the jumper's face (asumming there's no sun), you must get closer to him and use flash, along with a wide enough lens to cover the whole parachute.

So the -2/3 EC is probably responsible for this underexposure, and I should set it back to 0... sort of what I suspected.

try using partial metering and home the focus right at the subject which i assume the skydiver. If it's left as eval metering, the bright sky may cause wonky results. If you zoom in a little you may actually get first prize!

You have to be careful about what you meter. On any automatic mode, it can be death. That's why its good to use manual when you have situations where shutter speeds can change suddenly.

I agree with Grego. And I would avoid partial metering. You probably have the camera mounted on a helmet, don't you? Then I guess that framing is rather approximative and for the same reason, partial metering is rather risky.
But so is Tv mode! You're leaving the metering to your camera. The exposition will vary significantly depending on what you have in your frame. A lot of white clouds and the subject will be underexposed. I would try Manual mode.

Anyway, I envy you! Skydiving is such a kick!

How about underexposing by 1/3 stop. The main issue with the picture you linked (3rd prize) is that the white of the bottom guy is being overexposed, as thats the only way to keep the rest of the frame exposed properly. If you shoot RAW you can adjust exposure easily in a raw converter.

Leo

To answer this question, yes it is mounted on my head, and while the framing is a bit of guesswork (since I can't see borders), the AIMING is actually very controlled using a device called a ringsight which is mounted over my eye. I basically see a big target superimposed on whatever I'm looking at. Really cool device. I can usually guess pretty well what the framing will be since I always shoot at the same FOV. And yes, it's loads of fun.

Good shot of a ringsight here, on the whiteguy.

Thanks for the tips, everybody else.