• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / The Last Word / Raw exposure in situations that aren’t light-limited

Raw exposure in situations that aren’t light-limited

August 3, 2025 JimK 17 Comments

If there is plenty of light, raw exposure is usually not intellectually difficult with modern CMOS full-frame or larger cameras. The mantra is a twist on the old film rule: expose for the highlights, develop for the shadows. The idea is to give as generous an exposure as possible, subject to the constraint that important highlights are not saturated in any channel in the raw file. The word important is, ahem, important. In normal photography, specular highlights of limited extent can be allowed to clip, and usually allowing some clipping there will provide adequate signal-to-noise ratio in the shadows. Trying to keep the reflection of the sun from a car bumper from clipping will usually result in poor shadow detail.

A lot of the above is counterintuitive to many photographers. Some corollaries:

  • It doesn’t matter what the EVF image looks like to you.
  • It doesn’t matter what the JPEG preview image looks like.
  • Low contrast scenes will get, on average, more exposure than normal or high contrast scenes.
  • Low contrast scenes will look too bright in the JPEG preview image.
  • High contrast scenes will often look too dark in the JPEG preview image.

There is an erroneous idea that a “correct” exposure must place midtones in some predetermined place on the histogram. In fact, if you’re shooting raw and post-processing later, the placement of midtones is flexible. What matters is keeping as high a signal to noise ratio as possible, especially in the shadows where the sensor’s SNR ratio drops. If you underexpose unnecessarily, you may be able to recover tonal values, but see more noise.

What does matter when exposing in raw?

What matters is the raw data itself. Unfortunately, almost no camera today shows you a raw histogram, and the conventional method for approximating the raw histogram in the JPEG preview image results in ugly green MILC finder images. Tools like RawDigger or Fast Raw Viewer can help reveal how close you are to saturation in the raw file, but they are impractical to use in the field. What you can do is educate yourself about the difference between the raw histogram and the JPEG preview histogram so that in circumstances that you’ve previously encountered, you’ll know about what the raw histogram will look like by looking at the JPEG one.

This approach is about deliberately using as much of the sensor’s dynamic range as the scene allows. If your scene doesn’t have important highlights near clipping, then expose more generously. If it does, then back off, but only just enough to protect the highlights you care about.

The key to this approach is not to get greedy. If you have half a stop worth of unused dynamic range at the top of your raw histogram, it probably won’t make or break your image, but if you’ve clipped an important highlight by half a stop, that will be likely to have a visual effect on the developed photograph.

 

The Last Word

← Combining aberrations three at a time, peppers Exposure metering →

Comments

  1. Stepan Kana says

    August 5, 2025 at 1:46 pm

    “almost no camera today shows you a raw histogram” – is there a camera that does?
    One way to get around this is to use a dslr. The finder shows the scene as it is. You use exposure compensation, or spot metering, to get the scene right. Often on my Canon 6D using multi-metering, I find that I need to overexpose by 2/3 of a stop. Bright scenes need at least 1 stop overexposure. The spot-metering technique is tricky as you need to overexpose by about 2 1/3 stops if the subject is “average grayness”. You need to be thinking about that all the time and compensate for the brightness/darkness of the subject. Often you walk away with perfectly exposed, but banal pics 🙁 The multi-meter, if you’re aware of its limitations, allows you to focus on getting the pics you actually want.

    Reply
    • JimK says

      August 5, 2025 at 1:49 pm

      “almost no camera today shows you a raw histogram” – is there a camera that does?

      Some Canons with Magic Lantern. Betterlight backs.

      Reply
    • JimK says

      August 5, 2025 at 1:50 pm

      One way to get around this is to use a dslr. The finder shows the scene as it is. You use exposure compensation, or spot metering, to get the scene right.

      How is that an improvement over a live histogram?

      Reply
      • Štěpán Kaňa says

        August 5, 2025 at 2:18 pm

        I’ve no experience of ‘live histogram’. If you use f/2.8 lenses (or faster) on the canon, the scene as seen in the viewfinder is accurate 🙂 The problem with the screen at the back of the camera is that it crushes blacks. On the computer there is much more shadow detail. Also in bright conditions relying on the screen makes you overexpose. People want to be looking at pictures, not histograms. Oftentimes the histogram suggests one thing but the resulting photo doesn’t feel right. Yes, you can push/pull in the raw development software, but it’s not terribly good. If you push, you’re losing data. If you pull, the highlights look funny. Ultimately there is no correct ‘exposure’. It’s a decision made at the time of shooting, one you’ve to live with. Maybe 44x33mm sensors have more latitude.

        Reply
        • JimK says

          August 5, 2025 at 2:54 pm

          I’ve no experience of ‘live histogram’. If you use f/2.8 lenses (or faster) on the canon, the scene as seen in the viewfinder is accurate

          This is a discussion about how to set exposure. How does looking at the image in the optical finder help with that?

          Reply
        • JimK says

          August 5, 2025 at 2:55 pm

          The problem with the screen at the back of the camera is that it crushes blacks. On the computer there is much more shadow detail. Also in bright conditions relying on the screen makes you overexpose.

          Relying on the histogram on the screen makes you overexpose in bright conditions? How does that happen?

          Reply
        • JimK says

          August 5, 2025 at 2:56 pm

          People want to be looking at pictures, not histograms.

          This is about getting the right exposure. Do you really think I’m suggesting that a histogram be included in the presentation form of the image?

          Reply
        • JimK says

          August 5, 2025 at 2:57 pm

          Oftentimes the histogram suggests one thing but the resulting photo doesn’t feel right.

          Getting the correct raw exposure is not about what feels right.

          Reply
        • JimK says

          August 5, 2025 at 2:58 pm

          If you push, you’re losing data.

          Why do you say that? If there’s no clipping, you can push without losing data.

          Reply
        • JimK says

          August 5, 2025 at 2:59 pm

          If you pull, the highlights look funny.

          That’s why I’m saying don’t let the raw data clip.

          Reply
        • JimK says

          August 5, 2025 at 3:00 pm

          Ultimately there is no correct ‘exposure’.

          I beg to differ. There most certainly is.

          Reply
          • Štěpán Kaňa says

            August 6, 2025 at 1:59 pm

            Do you never adjust exposure in the post?
            The optical viewfinder only helps in that you have a real reference of the scene as it was. Of course, how it was might not be how you want it to be portrayed.
            On the canon the brightness of the screen doesn’t change so in bright light if you rely on the screen the pictures tend to be too bright. Maybe you can pull it to make it right without any loss, but the blinking highlights are unreliable and so is the histogram (on the canon!)
            If you push, shouldn’t you have exposed more, correspondingly?
            The comment about looking at pics vs histograms was facetious, reflecting my frustration with the canon firmware.
            Isn’t it also about the target medium? CMYK commercial printing vs. printing at home vs sharing on screens online in srgb jpegs. For newsprint you’d aim for brighter values overall than when using coated paper and so on. how do you determine your ‘correct raw exposure’ that is not about it feeling right, and is presumably independent of the target medium?

            Reply
            • JimK says

              August 6, 2025 at 3:26 pm

              Do you never adjust exposure in the post?

              You can’t change the exposure in post. The controls in Lr and Ps do different things, but neither one of them actually changes the exposure, which is fixed at the time the shutter is released. Changing the actual exposure affects the photon noise SNR.

              Reply
            • JimK says

              August 6, 2025 at 3:27 pm

              The optical viewfinder only helps in that you have a real reference of the scene as it was. Of course, how it was might not be how you want it to be portrayed.

              How does that help you pick the exposure?

              Reply
            • JimK says

              August 6, 2025 at 3:28 pm

              On the canon the brightness of the screen doesn’t change so in bright light if you rely on the screen the pictures tend to be too bright.

              I am not suggesting you rely on screen brightness to detirmine exposure at all.

              Reply
            • JimK says

              August 6, 2025 at 3:30 pm

              If you push, shouldn’t you have exposed more, correspondingly?

              If your important highlights are just short of clipping, more exposure is not what you want. That will drive them into clipping. Instead, lift the shadows in post.

              Reply
            • JimK says

              August 6, 2025 at 3:31 pm

              Isn’t it also about the target medium? CMYK commercial printing vs. printing at home vs sharing on screens online in srgb jpegs. For newsprint you’d aim for brighter values overall than when using coated paper and so on. how do you determine your ‘correct raw exposure’ that is not about it feeling right, and is presumably independent of the target medium?

              Proper raw exposure is independent of the target medium. Post processing is not.

              Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

January 2026
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Dec    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • pranza on Foveon Merrill color accuracy, continued
  • Dom on Exposure strategies for the Fuji GFX 50S — numbers
  • JimK on Exposure strategies for the Fuji GFX 50S — numbers
  • Dom on Exposure strategies for the Fuji GFX 50S — numbers
  • CarVac on Hasselblad X2DII shadow noise analysis
  • bruce on Input-Referred Noise in Image Sensors
  • bruce on Input-Referred Noise in Image Sensors
  • JimK on More Than Exposure: Understanding Total Light on the Sensor
  • Crack on More Than Exposure: Understanding Total Light on the Sensor
  • JimK on Hasselblad XCD 100-35 on X2D II, Siemens star, corner

Archives

Copyright © 2026 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.