I've never heard of such an exposure rule for stage shoots and this was
only my second stage shoot and the first one gave me no difficulty. But
after going back and taking another look at the images I have to
conclude that most are overexposed to the tune of 1/2 to 1-1/2 stops.
Applying a rule of -1 or even -1.5EV exposure compensation would have
resulted in much better images. Not only the exposure but the ability
to use a faster shutter speed. I'll have to do it differently next year.
Chuck Norcutt
C.H.Ling wrote:
> That is the histrogram fooling you, with a dark background and very small
> human faces, you should only read the face value, the histrogram will show
> nothing because the area of the faces added together is just too tiny
> compare with the whole scence. I never read histrogram for stage shoots, I
> will only use highlight warning tool if necessary. But in most cases I just
> under the exposure by 1 stop to avoid over expose of object, it is any old
> rule written on the exposure manual "for stage shoots, set -1.5EV under
> exposure".
>
> If you read the face in PS, either RGB value is over 220 then it is not
> right to me, I won't care about the background, the object is the people. As
> I mentioned before, if it is necessary just use a seperate layer to light up
> the background, it is never a good idea to over expose the face even there
> is RAW headroom.
>
> C.H.Ling
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Chuck Norcutt" <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>> They are definitely on the over side but not something that was readily
>> discernible looking at the histogram. The histogram on most shows a
>> mostly empty area on the upper two fifths of the graph but with a thin
>> red line running along the base line and popping up as a little pip at
>> the end indicating what I interpreted as minor hot spots in the red.
>> Well, it's more than minor. You may reasonably conclude that the image
>> background is overexposed but what you see is about what I saw with my
>> eyes and that was my guide doing the post-processing.
>>
>> Chuck Norcutt
>>
>>
>> Ken Norton wrote:
>>> This discussion about inverse-square and so on, is wonderful and
>>> everything
>>> and we might even be able to improve our photography in some manner, but
>>> all
>>> it takes is one scientist-wannabe here on the list quoting from
>>> Einstein's
>>> Theory of Relativity to throw our conclusions off.
>>> I agree that this must be a "5D" issue as it works just fine on my
>>> Olympus
>>> equipment.
>>>
>>> Oh, and back to Chuck's original issue--if he is having to pull back the
>>> exposure to keep the faces from burning out, then the exposure is
>>> actually
>>> on the "over" side. In looking at his posted images, I'd suggest that
>>> the
>>> exposures really are a bit on the hot side and the background, as pretty
>>> as
>>> it is, is actually too bright. A "proper" exposure, as a general rule,
>>> is
>>> one where the skin is about one-stop brighter than mid-tone. What Chuck
>>> is
>>> doing is exposing for the shadows and compressing the highlights to keep
>>> the
>>> skin from blowing out.
>>>
>>> AG
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|