A&P Which is easiest to fix in PP? Overexposure or Underexposure?

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by Smeghead, May 7, 2009.

  1. Smeghead

    Smeghead New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,108
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Klingonlandia
    Or they're equally difficult/easy to fix?
     
  2. UnNakedChef

    UnNakedChef 2jz Sackrider Holder

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    Messages:
    8,270
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Austin foo!
    Obviously correct exposure should be paramount, but if you miss, shooting RAW and underexposed are going to be the easiest to correct.
     
  3. darkjedi

    darkjedi Muay Thai expert

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2003
    Messages:
    3,811
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    93,234
    most of the time overexposure is harder sometimes almost impossible to correct
     
  4. DRAIGON

    DRAIGON New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2007
    Messages:
    743
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Texas
    I find over exposure is easier to correct. If no light hits your subject then its
    not getting recorded. If to much light hits the subject, then the data is there,
    its just a little blown. If you add light to a darker image, it tends to add noise to the photo imo.
     
  5. Smeghead

    Smeghead New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,108
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Klingonlandia
    But then you can always make it b&w :dunno: :o
     
  6. HighTachPres

    HighTachPres New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2004
    Messages:
    11,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Greenville, SC
    wrong sir
    more information is in the brighter part of the dynamic range
     
  7. DRAIGON

    DRAIGON New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2007
    Messages:
    743
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Texas
    :werd: Thats what I was trying to say.
     
  8. UnNakedChef

    UnNakedChef 2jz Sackrider Holder

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    Messages:
    8,270
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Austin foo!
    Now see, that would make the most sense to me and what I originally surmised based on the way a digital sensor takes in data and correspondingly saves it in RAW. But I was told that overexposed would lead to the top end of the data shown in a histogram to be clipped, therefore lost.

    But I takes your word for it, because your name is Clint, and you can't be wrong...unless your last name is Pohler, I guess. :wtc:
     
  9. HighTachPres

    HighTachPres New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2004
    Messages:
    11,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Greenville, SC
    lol
    I read it in this book, and went to a seminar with Bruce Fraser
    [​IMG]

    I can definitely tell too. Try exposing an underexposed picture in RAW compared to overexposed. I'm sure the practice hasn't changed much since CS2
     
  10. DRAIGON

    DRAIGON New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2007
    Messages:
    743
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Texas
    Get a taller histogram! J/K. I learned it in class.
     
  11. GlobeGuy

    GlobeGuy New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,974
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's a fine balance...overexposure is easier to correct as long as the data was not actually clipped.
     
  12. isaac86hatch

    isaac86hatch This thread sucks

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Messages:
    27,892
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Oregon
  13. themolsen

    themolsen New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2006
    Messages:
    7,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Jacksonville, FL
    as long as you're shooting in RAW, overexposed is a little easier to fix in my experience. there's usually a pretty good amount of RAW headroom and detail data that you can recover in PP. http://blog.dpreview.com/editorial/2009/01/raw-headroom.html

    in correcting an underexposed shot, however, I find it can add a good bit of noise, especially if it's a darker area that's underexposed
     
  14. Keiphus

    Keiphus my dog eats bears

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2005
    Messages:
    6,138
    Likes Received:
    0
    It depends how you define "overexposure".



    :ugh::rofl:
     
  15. Jonny Chimpo

    Jonny Chimpo OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2003
    Messages:
    64,811
    Likes Received:
    384
    Location:
    The sweaty asshole of the universe
    Someone needs to spend a year with their gear. :rofl:
     
  16. Jonny Chimpo

    Jonny Chimpo OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2003
    Messages:
    64,811
    Likes Received:
    384
    Location:
    The sweaty asshole of the universe
    Seriously, a better camera would fix the problem. Get a 5D so you can be pro.
     
  17. Smeghead

    Smeghead New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,108
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Klingonlandia
    Wrath of OTAP :noes:
     
  18. twinturboteddy

    twinturboteddy Bling Bling!

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2000
    Messages:
    1,056
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Gabriel, Ca, USA
    If you have a S5 pro. 7 stop over exp recovery ftmfw.
     
  19. ///Mik3

    ///Mik3 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2008
    Messages:
    911
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    All Over California
    As long as you're not clipping your highlights, overexposure would be better. However if overexposing has caused you to clip the highlights, then you'd have been better off w/ an underexposed image.
     
  20. EWhytsell

    EWhytsell New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    Messages:
    1,296
    Likes Received:
    0
    I guess the real question is, how far can you bump and underexposed image and still keep the noise down enough to use the image?

    I find if a scene has a lot of highlights and bright points that I need to capture along with lots of shadows that underexposing by 1/2 to 1 stop is better than blowing all the highlight detail and in most cases bumping the shadows to where I want them and then making a slight contrast adjustment makes the image quite usable.

    Your camera is dealing with 256 shades each of RGB. I've found that if you clip the highlights so that they all read 255 in a sizable patch on a subject your not fixing it in post. However if only 1 or 2 channels have been clipped PS does a pretty good job of saving that data.
     
  21. tenplanescrashing

    tenplanescrashing Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    9,287
    Likes Received:
    0
    Clipping is what people need to be aware of. Overexposure and underexposure aren't bad, but once you've clipped them, they're just black/white. I'd rather underexpose a little and bring back some details as needed rather than overexpose but it would depend on where my need for detail is.
     
  22. Dan Martin

    Dan Martin OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2009
    Messages:
    131
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    "Expose to the right"

    I can actually tell if a picture is overexposed or underexposed just by looking at the file size. There is a ton more data on the right side of the histogram than there is on the left. On my camera I can see an increase of about 10MB per RAW file for an image that is one stop over compared to one that is one stop under.
     

Share This Page