I'm learning to use my histogram for taking images and feel I'm doing well but there are a couple of photos I've taken I'm not quite so sure.
The subject matter is fire but it's burning through the day. I have 2 pictures, the second one the histogram is spot on. The background is perfect but then the fire doesn't quite stand out. The first one the background is darker so the histogram is off to the left. The fire stands out more though. It's the best fire photo anyway but should I go with the darker one. Is it ok to go against the histogram sometimes?
I've never tried using the histogram, but the way I see it, if you prefer one photo over the other, then go with it. The histogram is science, so doesn't take into account feelings and moods and that sort of thing.
It is definitely OK to "ignore" the histogram, depending on what you are trying to achieve. For example, if you're trying to capture a silhouette, you'll likely end up with a histogram which is skewed to the left. As an example, this is a shot I took about 40 minutes after sunset:
At the mo I'm between computers so using picnik online but normally I would use cs4. I have a few shots which I can't decide on.
1. what I actually see. only tweaking I did was sharpening and cutting
2. darkened the image on the camera before shot the cropped it
3. used the darkened image through picnik and "ortoned" it which made it a bit more darker but the fire stands out.
Are photos better from what you see or are changes better. I prefer to take fire photos when it's dark but the fire will be out by tonight.
Oh meant to say, the what I can see photo (1.) the histogram was spot on. The darker one it was off to the left as I turned the shutter speed up. I can't play with the f numbers as the lens isn't fully compatible with my camera so only works on the lowest f number.
I used to live by my histogram but now I've learned not to. It really does come down to what kind of look you're trying to achieve and if you go by your histogram you may not get the results you are looking for all of the time.
I rely more on my camera meter plus I shoot in RAW and can make alot of my adjustments while post-processing, as if I was just shooting the image... I don't feel my exposure has to be exactly right because of that. But it's good to know what the histogram does and at times I do find it helpful.
Thanks. As of tomorrow I'll forget my histogram, lol.
I decided not to put the fire pics on as I wanted to show something else but was using the fire as a back up plan but I may add it to my third folder which is of new and old pics I like
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
And this is the histogram:
Sorry if its a bit small.
http://www.lightandmatter.org/2011/tech-photography-articles/understanding-your-histogram-part-1/
and:
1. what I actually see. only tweaking I did was sharpening and cutting
2. darkened the image on the camera before shot the cropped it
3. used the darkened image through picnik and "ortoned" it which made it a bit more darker but the fire stands out.
Are photos better from what you see or are changes better. I prefer to take fire photos when it's dark but the fire will be out by tonight.
I rely more on my camera meter plus I shoot in RAW and can make alot of my adjustments while post-processing, as if I was just shooting the image... I don't feel my exposure has to be exactly right because of that. But it's good to know what the histogram does and at times I do find it helpful.
I decided not to put the fire pics on as I wanted to show something else but was using the fire as a back up plan but I may add it to my third folder which is of new and old pics I like