Posted by Scott Frye on February 15, 2014 at 7:46 PM
When did we stop showing Exposure Controls (EC) as part of the techs for our photos? Shouldn't that be part of the total tech information? If this is to be a learning forum, that is important information especially dealing with the black or white subjects.
In fact, if you used EC in the photo and do not show it in your techs -- you are not reporting the accurate information for the photo.
Lets start reporting accurate techs for our photos including EC.
Posted by Keith Bauer on February 15, 2014 at 11:50 PM
I assume what you are really referring to is exposure compensation. Yes it would be nice, but remember that many people, me included, shoot in manual exposure mode for many situations so exposure compensation is meaningless and not recorded as part of the EXIF info.
Posted by Paul DeCesare on February 16, 2014 at 12:03 AM
Hey Scott, exposure compensation is something done when shooting in any mode except manual, to correct for a scene that fools the camera's meter. If you weren't there to see the light and monitor how your camera is reacting to it, then it seems like that's not really useful info after the fact. I may be wrong (wouldn't be the first time, lol!).
Posted by Howard Cheek on February 16, 2014 at 6:13 AM
Paul's "If you weren't there to see the light and monitor how your camera is reacting to it, then it seems like that's not really useful info after the fact." is a true statement. I shoot mostly in shutter priority, and constantly bump the EC +/- as the scene changes slightly.
So it's not a big help to know, other than in a very general way Scott.
Posted by Kent Staubus on February 16, 2014 at 10:41 AM
Many of my shots are taken at night, with big flash set ups. Instead of using exposure compensation, I simply dial the power on the flash up or down. Many of my other shots are taken with prewar or even pre-Civil War camera gear. There is no exposure compensation. On some of my cameras/lenses thre isn't even a shutter or an adjustable aperature.
I think Scott was referring to basic stats not just EC values, but I might be wrong. Looking at his strong collection of images in his gallery he has provided in-depth specs on his posted images.
I would say I've never been one to track this information at all. Like Kent my gear is ALL manual. So the data that is so conveniently stored in a digital shot is an item that would require being written down and tracked on a per shot basis. I know folks who certainly do this and know exactly what the settings were at the given time. However, I've never found a reason to myself. Typically, if I found a shot to be off it was through something off on my own calculations not equipment failure.
Additionally, I'm sure what exposure was used with Velvia 50 film would have little correlation to any digital shooter. Again, I could be wrong but still a moot point as I never track it for myself.
...exposure compensation is something done when shooting in any mode except manual
Paul, I have to disagree with the 'except manual' part of your statement. Even in 'manual mode' one can adjust the exposure from an 'indicated' meter reading in order to place highlight, mid tone, or shadow value higher or lower on the scale.
In regard to posting EC values as part of tech info, I think it would be rather meaningless unless the tonal values in the posted image have not been adjusted in post processing. If they have, then the poster may or may not choose to tell us what adjustments they made in post.
Personally, I do quite a bit of tonal and/or color adjustments to my images. A full explanation of what I do would make for wordy posts which I don't have the time to do. If a viewer really wants to know how I processed a specific image, they are more than welcome to contact me.
Discussion
6 repliesIn fact, if you used EC in the photo and do not show it in your techs -- you are not reporting the accurate information for the photo.
Lets start reporting accurate techs for our photos including EC.
So it's not a big help to know, other than in a very general way Scott.
Kent in SD
I would say I've never been one to track this information at all. Like Kent my gear is ALL manual. So the data that is so conveniently stored in a digital shot is an item that would require being written down and tracked on a per shot basis. I know folks who certainly do this and know exactly what the settings were at the given time. However, I've never found a reason to myself. Typically, if I found a shot to be off it was through something off on my own calculations not equipment failure.
Additionally, I'm sure what exposure was used with Velvia 50 film would have little correlation to any digital shooter. Again, I could be wrong but still a moot point as I never track it for myself.
Paul, I have to disagree with the 'except manual' part of your statement. Even in 'manual mode' one can adjust the exposure from an 'indicated' meter reading in order to place highlight, mid tone, or shadow value higher or lower on the scale.
In regard to posting EC values as part of tech info, I think it would be rather meaningless unless the tonal values in the posted image have not been adjusted in post processing. If they have, then the poster may or may not choose to tell us what adjustments they made in post.
Personally, I do quite a bit of tonal and/or color adjustments to my images. A full explanation of what I do would make for wordy posts which I don't have the time to do. If a viewer really wants to know how I processed a specific image, they are more than welcome to contact me.
--P