Underexposed Photos and the Histogram

[gohan2091]

Hello, I am new to this forum and have a question about the histogram and how dark/light a photo is on a screen. I'm still learning photography and the two photo I attached I took about 6 months ago. I have done some processing within Lightroom 4 to brighten it up a bit. It actually looks good on my monitor with no loss of detail in the darker areas. For me, both photos are correctly exposed (while the building still having a dark, gloomy feel). I must admit, the histogram is an aid I don't fully understand. I have attached the histogram of the photos and would like others to view these. Do the photos appear too dark for your screen? From what I understand of the histogram, the photos are both underexposed a fair bit due to the absence of information from the middle to the right side. Thanks for any help!

EDIT: Building Histogram is beside it, the portrait Histogram is on the bottom line. I do not know how to reposition these.

 

[pedroj]

Hi and welcome... The link below is a good description of the Histogram...

Understanding Histograms

 

[ohkphoto]

Both are a little too dark for my preferences. According to the histogram for the building, you have some "clipping" in the shadows (if you turn it on in Lightroom, it'll flash blue where the clipping occures) You did a good job on the right side of the histogram . . . with no "blown out" highlights. You can still keep the gloomy feel of the building but use the fill light slider to add a little more light and cut back on the black slider to add more detail to the shadow.

In the portrait, while her face is nicely exposed, her hair blends with the background. If it were my photo, I would add enough light (fill light slider or exposure slider) to separate her hair from the background .

The histogram is an excellent tool/standard because everybody's monitor is different. Good for you for paying attention to it.

 

[gohan2091]

Thanks both of you for your replies. @ohkphoto, I just turned on clipping in Lightroom (hotkey J) and there is indeed some slight clipping but only on the whites of the streetlamps. There are no blue pixels in the black at all. For this histogram, I made sure to leave a little gap on the left side to ensure it doesn't touch the histogram wall. For the portrait, unfortunately there is no fill light slider in Lightroom 4.2. If I grab the histogram with my cursor from the centre (exposure) or the right (hightlights or whites) it makes the histogram look less bias on the left side but the face becomes too white. I can brighten up the stairs behind her with the shadow slider but then the blacks become too light. To be honest, i can brighten up this image but I lose the deep blacks I want.

From what I already know about histograms and the link that Alan posted, am I right in saying that even if many pixels are bunched up to the left hand side, as long as they aren't touching the left wall and there is a gap, everything will be ok and not underexposed?

 

[Eye-level]

Your lens is probably not fast enough to do what you are trying to do. You have a maybe a stop with the shutter speed maybe a stop with the ISO depending on what body you are using so that might have allowed you to pull off a better tonal range and better exposure...your histogram would have been more "center weighted" if you will in that case. Highlights are very important too not just the rich blacks. It is all about the contrast and the light. B&W would help you probably as you are going in the right direction.

Post production is essential but getting it as close as you can in camera is also extremely important. Perhaps you could try bracketing shots like these for more comprehensive exposure results to choose from and maybe even blend together.

 

[gohan2091]

What do you mean by bracketing shots Eye-level? What you said makes sense and it's something I didn't think about. I don't have as much flexibility with RAW files as I once thought.

 

[Pierro]

Bracketing takes a series of shots, over and under your EV setting. How many shots you can set depends on your camera, but since you havent listed any camera gear in your profile, cant give you any help there

I can take up to 9 , so say i meter the scene and then choose bracketing ( 9 shots ), i will get the original metered shot, plus another 4 under exposed in ever increasing values and 4 over exposed in ever increasing values. Those values you will have to set in the menu, so something like 1/3rd or 1 etc. You then combine all 9 in Photoshop as one photo and process. This will avoid the need to mess too much bringing up dark areas in such shots, because that will show even more noise than is already evident in your building shot

Helen kinda said what i would have. The girl needs less extra processing than the building, but the building can still be sorted

 

[gohan2091]

I use a Nikon D5100. Can I do the bracketing on this camera? How does this work exactly? I take a shot, and the camera will take multiple shots with different exposures automatically?

 

[Pierro]

Have a look in your manual, it will tell you what settings are available for bracketing

Yes, basically you set the camera to burst mode, initiate bracketing and tell your camera how many shots and how it jumps in EV ( 1/3 rd 1/2 etc ) between shots..

Then hit the button, and all 3, 5 , 7, 9, or whatever shots will fire.

 

[gohan2091]

That's interesting, I shall certainly check it out! Could people here have a look at my adjusted portrait (bottom) and compare it to my original (top)? I've been reading up on histograms a bit more and was wondering if it still appears too dark?

​

 

[Dave_W]

Because a histogram is essentially a logarithmic graph of the data, there is a great deal more information to the right of center than the left. So it's always best to push the bulk of your histogram slightly to the right of center. You will end up with a lot more data to work with. That said, your histograms indicate you've under exposed your image by a couple of stops at least. Bracketing your shots is one way to avoid this but IMO it's easier to just check your histogram data in real time and adjust as needed.

 

[gohan2091]

I took the portrait shot with a SB-700 (on camera) pointed in reverse at a white umbrella. When I read up on histograms last night, I understand now that I should set my histogram slightly more to the right than to the left so I have more to work with. It appears the RAW file for this portrait does not provide me with the enough data to properly exposure the photo without the whole thing blowing up. Does the 2nd adjusted portrait look dark on your screen Dave_W ? because on mine, it looks properly exposed.

 

[Pierro]

Personally I like the 2nd attempt with the hair, but for me, the stairs have been brought out more, which is not the interesting part of the subject, and also, i prefer the lovely original skin colour of the girl, whereas now she appears a bit wishy washy... here's what i mean, if you dont mind me posting this. I did selective highlighting rather than raising the whole exposure

 

[Pierro]

 

[gohan2091]

Oh, that's absolutely fine to edit my pictures, I have no problem. Looking at my original edit and the revision, I do agree with you that on the revision, the skin is a bit wishy washy, however for me the background looks much better. Whether the lighter background makes the attention being taken off the subject is debatable. The girl is my sister and on your edit, the skin is too dark, she is lighter skinned than that. I'm viewing the pictures on my smartphone now as this confirms how I feel.

 

[Pierro]

Well of course i dont know your sister, so if she's lighter skinned, then its easily remedied. The debate on the background is fine, as its just my personal preference, but i dont think its that interesting

 

[gohan2091]

I agree that the background is boring but I just prefer the stairs not being too dark. Thanks all for the replies, I learnt a lot of important things.

 

[Dave_W]

. Does the 2nd adjusted portrait look dark on your screen Dave_W ? because on mine, it looks properly exposed.

Yes, the second photo looks much better than the first one. I didn't see it when I responded to your post but looking at it now I think it looks fine.

Btw, how were you able to get an image of the histogram? That's very cool! I would like to learn how to do that.

 

[Marcel]

Btw, how were you able to get an image of the histogram? That's very cool! I would like to learn how to do that.

Probably screen capture cut and paste from LR? Just guessing.

 

[gohan2091]

Print screen button from keyboard. Paste into Photoshop then crop and save as a jpeg