Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


D800 histogram & highlights


7 May 2013 3:59PM
2.4 stops difference in dynamic range (12:14.4) to be exact. Smile

I use Adobe software, so ADL is no use to me.

I'm not too bothered how it looks on the back, as long as I can see the composition properly, and the histograms and highlight warnings reflect reality.

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Paul Morgan e2
13 16.1k 6 England
7 May 2013 6:09PM
A histogram on the back of a camera is not going to reflect the Raw data, only jpeg, there not reflecting reality.

If your worried about colour accuracy get something like a colour checker passport and use it.
7 May 2013 6:34PM
Got one of those.

You can get a jpeg histogram to look like a raw histogram. I've done it once.

There's no need for everyone to keep me on the straight and narrow. I'm sorted now thanks.
mikehit e2
5 7.1k 11 United Kingdom
7 May 2013 6:48PM
I'd still be interested to see if you can tell the difference between images using your 'custom' histogram and an in-camera histogram on a D800. Let us know how it turns out.
Paul Morgan e2
13 16.1k 6 England
7 May 2013 6:50PM
Set the camera to take Raw + jpeg then compare the two.
7 May 2013 7:03PM
Tell the difference? There's not supposed to be a difference. It's all about getting an optimum exposure.

Regarding the raw+jpeg suggestion: what would be the point? No. Please don't answer that. Honestly, I'm fine. I don't need any more help.
mikehit e2
5 7.1k 11 United Kingdom
7 May 2013 7:12PM

Quote:Tell the difference? There's not supposed to be a difference. It's all about getting an optimum exposure.


But I thought the intention was that 'optimum exposure' gives you the best amount of detail to work with? I was interested that given the capabilities of the D800, how much more detail do you get using your 'custom' histogram to judge ETTR compared to using the in-camera jpeg histogram to judge ETTR. I'm not winding you up, just interested.
7 May 2013 8:44PM
I see what you mean. Well, I suppose I'd have to take a few photos of the same scene and process them the same, showing 100% crops of a test area. I'll see what I can sort out, once I've got my head around this RawDigger setup.

I do appreciate that the D800 will be more forgiving than the D300 was. It was easy to see the benefit of ettr with it. However, maths is maths, and the theory applies to any camera, so it will be interesting to see the results.
Gaucho e2
13 2.4k 2 United Kingdom
7 May 2013 9:44PM
Well I'm curious so it would be good if you could Smile
Paul Morgan e2
13 16.1k 6 England
7 May 2013 10:48PM

Quote:Regarding the raw+jpeg suggestion: what would be the point? No. Please don't answer that. Honestly, I'm fine. I don't need any more help


Because the histogram on the camera applies to the jpeg.
8 May 2013 7:27AM

Quote:Because the histogram on the camera applies to the jpeg.

The histogram in the Raw applies to the embedded JPEG preview, which would be the same as a separate JPEG, only saved at Basic quality. How would you compare the two, and why? The only useful comparison I can think of is the histogram on the camera, of either the Raw or the JPEG (they're both the same), and the histogram in the Raw converter (ACR), which is what I've been doing all along. Or am I missing something?
mikehit e2
5 7.1k 11 United Kingdom
8 May 2013 8:50AM

Quote:the histogram on the camera, of either the Raw or the JPEG (they're both the same),


I don't understand that (unless it is a typo) - you cannot get a raw histogram on the camera, you can only get the histogram of the jpeg relevant to he picture style that is set in the camera. So if you shoot 'landscape' the histogram you get will be different to the histogram you get if you shoot 'portrait', and that histogram is applied whether you are shooting raw, jpeg or raw+jpeg. The jpg file will have some (not much) latitude beyond the histogram you see on the camera LCD, the parent raw file will have much more latitude. What you are proposing is creating a picture style that represents the raw file even further.
8 May 2013 8:58AM

Quote:you cannot get a raw histogram on the camera, you can only get the histogram of the jpeg relevant to he picture style that is set in the camera. So if you shoot 'landscape' the histogram you get will be different to the histogram you get if you shoot 'portrait', and that histogram is applied whether you are shooting raw, jpeg or raw+jpeg. The jpg file will have some (not much) latitude beyond the histogram you see on the camera LCD, the parent raw file will have much more latitude. What you are proposing is creating a picture style that represents the raw file even further.

It's just semantics. If you shoot Raw+JPEG, the Raw file contains a copy of the JPEG at Basic quality. The histogram in the Raw file is that of the JPEG at whatever Picture Control was in use at the time. So, yes, the histogram on the camera will be the same for either file, because they are both based on the JPEG—embedded or separate. Does that make sense? I'm losing the will to live.
Paul Morgan e2
13 16.1k 6 England
8 May 2013 5:03PM
No they are not the same, but you can make them look very similar by adjusting your jpegs settings, there is not histogram for the raw image in camera.

See this example Raw V Jpeg opened in LR, I tweaked the jpeg settings in camera to get the histograms very similar, though there is still some slight clipping in the jpeg highlights.

5-untitled-1.jpg

Nick_w e2
7 4.1k 99 England
8 May 2013 5:12PM
That RAWs a bit underexposed Paul Tongue

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.