EV compensation

Ah Smeggy

"How do you know what what works for someone else or not? I only know what works for me I wouldn't even think to be so presumptuous as to claim to know what works for someone else"

You are arguing against yourself as it appears you would advise beginners to throw the "rule book" (and I use the term loosely) out of the window and shoot like you do cos obviously thats the way to go. Now presumably you wouldnt advise them to do this if you didnt think it would work for them. So to take this to its logical conclusion you are PRESUMING it would and that would be presumptious non?:

How about this one say a beginner buys a DSLR because he is going on a holiday of a lifetime. Which kind of apporach do you think will net him the shots he is after? what would your advise to him be?

Do you think that following sound general practise in photography yields results that could not be described as Art?

Sorry for all the questions but it appears that you do in fact seem to think that your approach works for many others despite what you are posting.

FOR THE OP :

I do pretty much the same as Bill Barnes I use highlight protection and shadow correction (low or medium)and find this works for me. I also mainly use evaluative metering although centre or spot is useful depending in subject e.g. moon shots with telephoto need spot metering.

I am also a jpeg shooter( shock horror shoot me down )and do some basic post processing on most of my shots.

Daniel

Ansel Adams split photography into "craft" and "art". "Craft" was having the skill to use the equipment and know what the impacts were of any decision. Art was the vision to know what would make a good image.

With digital cameras the craft of exposure is simply getting the histogram of luminance values not to touch either end of the graph. If you manage that, you can screw around with the image in PP as much as you please and have your blown highlights or blacked out shadows.

For the original question: set the camera to show you the histogram when you take the image. If it is overlapping the right hand edge, dial in some negative compensation, if it is overlapping the left edge dial in some positive. Now that is both simples, and good 'craft'. The histogram is the biggest benefit of digital photography from the viewpoint of craft.

If you get your exposure right 'in camera' there is nothing wrong with this. Shooting RAW allows you to mess-up a bit more!

Best wishes, Kris.

Well put Kris, I come from the "he who never made a mistake, never made anything " school maybe I make a lot of mistakes but it works for me ...jeff..

I'm just looking back at what python118 asked specifically, and my advice would have a look through a good digital photography book at the sections dealing with exposure matters.

Immediately, if images are too dark (or bright) in areas, I would activate the warnings for this on the LCD display - go to the 'playback' tab in the menu, and find the 'shadow / highlight warning' box and put a tick. After taking a photo press the play button and the picture will be on the screen - if there are flashing patches of yellow then these parts of your shot are too dark to contain any detail. (I accept that creatively someone may choose to keep this, but in general this would suggest the photo could benefit from more exposure)

If there are flashing patches of red then these parts of the shot are too bright to contain any detail. If there are both yellow and red patches flashing then you need to think about the image and decide what parts are more important. Too bright 'highlights' (the red patches) are normally acceptable if they are only on 'hotspots' - for example the brightest corners of a very white cloud, or a shining piece on a polished chrome car bumper. If they are more dominant, say the whole cloud is flashing, then you need minus exposure compensation. Try -0.5 (half a stop in photography terms)and shoot again. if still too much red flashing then try -1.0.

If you are worried about dark areas and there is yellow flashing in those parts, then set + compensation - try +0.5 and then +1.0 if needed. You can go further if you want, but for most shots goping beyond +1.5 or 2.0 will just push the brighter parts of you photo too much, meaning you'll get more 'red flashes' showing too bright area. So it will end up being a compromise.

Once you've got used to controlling the basic exposure settings of your photos by this method and not seeing the very dark areas, you can think about and learn about the issues that others have talked about here - such as when to use exposure compensation to correct for the camera meter's limitations and to use exposure setting for a specific creative effect.

Sorry, one other point - python118 asked about the ISO setting. Ths ISO setting does not affect the exposure value (EV) of the photo - it is this value that we are talking about. The only setting you can apply on the camera that changes the exposure value directly is the exposure compensation control, which you were right to focus on.

While you are experimenting with this control, I would suggest letting your camera worry about the ISO. Set the camera to auto iso for this - on my K7 I would press the info button to bring up the control panel, select the auto iso button (near the top left) and I would suggest setting the range of this to 200 - 800. This limits the auto setting of the camera to these outer extremes, and for general photography this should produce an acceptable iso setting for all your shots. Also set the mode dial to P. (Don't forget that your exposure compensation settings will not work if your use the green square setting, I think).

Once you have got to grips with good control over your exposures, then check out the sections in that photography book on ISO and how to use this to advantage.

Daniel please go back and read my posts and see what you've written above has little or nothing to do with my position on the matter.

Exactly, and what might be considered a 'mistake' by the 'correct and proper' brigade can often be a cool picture

Here's an example

A bit tricky to assess just what exactly you mean by 'what might be considered a 'mistake' by the 'correct and proper' brigade can often be a cool picture' when you've removed the EXIF data.

The picture looks a perfectly acceptable snapshot to me taken in dim lighting conditions but to be quite honest I think the twaddle you posted earlier is the sort of stuff that gets the internet a bad name.

Heh... come on Ken lighten up..jeff..

Yes, getting back to the OP, about 0.3 EV

Because YOU don't agree with it? Glad to see you think you're important enough and qualified enough to speak for everyone who uses the Internet. I stand by my twaddle and shall continue posting it with gusto

I didn't remove the EXIF data. It seems Facebook removes it. I can go and find it, but surely yuo don't need to see the EXIF data? Just look at the picture.

How wonderful it is to be able to check the image (or histogram) immediately after shooting it, tweak it and have another go if it's wrong. In 'the old days' you often had to wait a week to see how 'correct' your metering had been (probably having forgotten how you did it in the first place).

To answer the OP, you need to use it when the camera meter is fooled by the subject brightness. This is difficult when using matrix/evaluative/segmented metering as these may (or may not) have already compensated for the problem. Thus it only really works in spot or (less precisely) center-weighted metering.

When dealing with tricky lighting I do check the histogram etc. but I always prefer to use manual mode than auto with exp. comp.

Exactly. Even more of a reason to indulge in carefree photography ( for those that want to ).

I described myself as an 'advanced beginner' and as such I fully support the views of those who believe that novice users of DSLRs ought to have a basic theoretical framework, as a prerequisite, to understand the fundamentals of exposure. I strongly suspect the large majority of beginners share those views. Dissenters amongst that category can, of course, challenge that!

Our artistry and creativity can and will, no doubt, flow from that over time.
That has been my experience so far....it's proving to be a rather steep learning curve!

The light at the end of the tunnel still looks very dim. Following the forum has been, and I hope continue to be, beneficial and fun.