Technical Question Is “Expose to the Right” relevant with current digital cameras

[Asher Kelman]

The late original editor and founder of Luminous Landscape, Michael Reichman, preached a rule the became a mantra for all of us: ETTR i.e., “expose to the right”.

The idea was to reduce shot noise.

We all thought that was something that Moses would have added to the 10 commandments had he been gifted with a digital camera of 10 years back!

Now arrived, Steve Perry, a new truth-teller who says otherwise! He questions the whole concept of expose to the right with modern sensors “shot noise only depends on number of photons collected by the sensor during exposure.

He claims that doesn’t matter how the aperture, shutter speed or even ISO is set! The only things that matters is how many photons were collected!

See the video here


Asher

 

[Asher Kelman]

A great description of ETTR can be found in Wikipedia, here!

 

[Asher Kelman]

So who will still use ETTR?

I am sobered up now and just care about getting sufficient light into the camera to minimize shot noise!

But can we do do better?

Remember that pixels, or more better “senses” which represent shadows, need to have low shot noise too!

Also the accuracy of the count is related to the total number of photons captured as electrons. Accuracy is determined by root n/n x 100.

So I suggest the following:

“bracketing a scene should get all the pixels in the exposure scale sufficiently counted accurately and also the shot noise should be optimized.”

Do you have any argument with that contention?

Asher

 

[Doug Kerr]

I would first want to be sure I know what you mean by "bracketing a scene".

Doug

 

[Asher Kelman]

I would first want to be sure I know what you mean by "bracketing a scene".

Doug

Exposure bracketing. You may not be familiar with modern bracketing options.

One can have focus bracketing whereby a series of shots is taken with some front focused and others back focused and then the shots are stacked and the focused areas are fused in an optimally focused entire picture.

The same is achieved in exposure bracketing, again built in to modern cameras, say a sequence of shots + 0.5, 2.0, 1.5 and2.0 EV and then normal exposure and a similar series of decreased exposure.

Asher

 

[Jerome Marot]

The late original editor and founder of Luminous Landscape, Michael Reichman, preached a rule the became a mantra for all of us: ETTR i.e., “expose to the right”.

The idea was to reduce shot noise.

A quick look to the link above gives the reason why the late Michael Reichman imagined that rule: at the time dynamic range of digital cameras was 5 to 6 stops. Therefore, fitting the dynamic range of the scene within that limited range needed compromises. Interestingly, the dynamic range of slide film (the kind landscape photographers used) was about as limited, so compromises were also needed for slide film.

What Michael Reichman noted is that the compromises were not the same. With slide film, one loses the shadows. With digital sensors of the time, shadows could yield some information, provided one exposed "to the right".

Today's cameras have 10 to 12 stops of dynamic range (the sensors may have more, but lens flare limits the end dynamic range). That compromise is no longer needed. One can "lift the shadows" of any picture without noticing negative effects.

As a side note, the dynamic range of displays can be even more limited. This is especially true for prints, in particular on mate paper. There is a reason why museums display photographs as glossy prints under direct light.

 

[Asher Kelman]

Once again, Jérôme,

Your contributions provide the most valuable factual reminders of what’s relevant here: dynamic range, which, as you point out so succinctly, has released us from the previous compromises we were forced to endure!

I should have thought of that myself!

Thank goodness you are far more awake today than I am!

Asher

 

[Robert Watcher]

I’m a bit of a hack as a photographer, because I’m never really too concerned with trying to get my exposure “technically” right.

I have never used a histogram on my camera screen, when taking a picture —— not have I ever used a histogram in my editing software. I am totally familiar with how it works and what it means. I am always shooting in Auto modes and constantly dialing my exposure compensation up and down based on what I see on my camera screen or viewfinder (using mirrorless cameras where it is always in live view). If I want some confirmation in extreme settings, I can always use the blinking blue and orange shadow / highlight setting on my screen, to confirm what parts of the photo are out of range.

Anyway, because I have never taken note of the usefulness of exposing to the right on a histogram while shooting —— I grabbed my camera with the files still on from shooting extreme lighting situation the other night at a music gig. Surprisingly the use of the histogram would have been useless. In fact if I based my exposures on exposing to the right, I would have totally lost the mood of the setting.

I’m not saying that expose to the right isn’t useful or valid in balanced lighting conditions, if that is what someone wants to use, but it isn’t the end-all.

I’m sorry that these pics taken with my phone of the back of my camera, are such poor quality —— but they reflect my findings.


Here is using the shadow / highlight blinkies which shows the dark crowd and foreground out of range and crushed blacks. But that is fine with my artistic vision for the photo. I dnt notice any orange areas of overexposure - especially on the main singer —- and when I zoom in on the main part of the scene, I have an exposure that I am happy with. I’ll let everything else land where it may

Now the interesting part is 5ge Histogram reading of this scene. Good thing I didn’t rely on adjusting exposure comp to make the highlights reach the right side

And then there is this pic, where the orange overexposure blinkies are clearly visible on a spotlight and some other streaks of light. Adjusting to the right on the histogram for this, would have been traumatic.

I don’t know that this proves anything or is useful, but it just validates my use of the Shadow / Highlight blinkies for verification of extremes. Where I found this useful was in a Portrait job that I had last fall, where the large family had to be positioned in the open midday sun overhead and slightly behind. I filled in light the best I could with two portable flashes. I was able to benefit from the Shadow Highlight information to determine how much overexposure was on different parts of the scene, some areas I let clip as long as it didn’t affect the people. The one thing with this setting, is that the blinkies only show once you take a photo and review it. That worked perfectly for something like the portrait session.