I did some research on the web about this as well. But I've taken about 150 shots so far and I'd venture to guess that they are all under exposed by about 1 stop. Using Nikon View I am constantly having to add +1 to the Exposure Setting.
Can I please get some other people's opinions on this.
Give me my D2Hs and 50mm 1.4, then step out of my way.
#1. "RE: D100: Under Exposing By 1" | In response to Reply # 0Wed 02-Oct-02 01:04 AM
I fully agree!
I normally leave my flash set at +0.7 EV. It seems to be okay there MOST of the time. On camera speed-light flash seems more accurate. It is my SB flashes that cause the most trouble.
I shot a bunch at +1.0 EV and found that I was pushing some of the highlights into the blow out range. So now I am back to +0.7
#2. "RE: D100: Under Exposing By 1" | In response to Reply # 1
#3. "RE: D100: Under Exposing By 1" | In response to Reply # 1Ritimo Registered since 07th Aug 2002Wed 02-Oct-02 11:06 AM
Is the d100 only underexposing when using flash? Darrell, I read that you sometimes have the camera exposure at +0.3 EV. Do you leave it set like this all of the time? I just got my d100 so I'm just beginning to learn how to get most out of it. I would like to have the option of shooting fine jpgs and getting them printed straight from the camera with decent results if not close to perfect. I understand that I can tweak the images in photoshop-which I do not have a problem with-but I would like to believe that I don't have to do it with snapshots.
#4. "RE: D100: Under Exposing By 1" | In response to Reply # 3photons Nikonian since 01st Jul 2002Wed 02-Oct-02 12:06 PM
I had been using the +0.3 EV for the camera setting as well as the +0.7 EV on the SB flash, but found that in many cases, the highlights were blown out. I have gone back to the default exposure settings and I am resigned to adjusting practically every image (in Nikon Capture, mostly) for exposure and/or contrast (using levels).
Russ in CT
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
#5. "RE: D100: Under Exposing By 1" | In response to Reply # 4gewe21 Basic MemberWed 02-Oct-02 12:21 PM
This is my favorite. For me, it works fine in "lifting" the midrange without blowing out the highlights.
"Dude, you're getting a Nikkor !!!"
#6. "RE: D100: Under Exposing By 1" | In response to Reply # 5Ritimo Registered since 07th Aug 2002Wed 02-Oct-02 01:54 PM
I read about making a custom curve and I am willing to try it - but don't you guys think that the curve in the camera should be "correct". Has anyone heard if Nikon is going to update their own or release a revised firmware version where it is corrected? I don't have a problem trying to adjust the images myself but I am a little disturbed that Nikon could not get this very basic point figured out. Again, I am new to the d100 and still learning. I want to be able to point and shoot and be able to get prints of "snapshots" as well as having full creative control of my images - this is why I bought the camera afterall - but so far not being able to point, shoot, download and burn to cd, print (and have correct exposure) has me a little unsettled after paying $2,000 for a camera. As far as the images that I correct, I have no problem. I really like this camera, and I want to make it work for me.
Sorry if I'm being a little long winded but I am a little frustrated.
Thanks for any replies....
#7. "RE: D100: Under Exposing By 1" | In response to Reply # 6photons Nikonian since 01st Jul 2002Wed 02-Oct-02 02:32 PM
I have had the same feelings about the camera - i.e., troubled by not being able to "snapshoot" and print. After three months of struggling with this and other issues, and keeping close track of the fine advice available on this web site, I have concluded that this just cannot be done. Images at least must be sharpened.
As far as the custom tone curve is concerned: tone compensation can be done in Nikon Capture for each image in a truly "custom" manner, rather than applying an in-camera one which may not be suitable for each image. At least with the default tone curve in the D100, one is almost certain NOT to blow out highlights.
Russ in CT
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
#8. "RE: D100: Under Exposing By 1" | In response to Reply # 6Valkeerie Registered since 30th Aug 2002Fri 04-Oct-02 10:06 AM
>I read about making a custom curve and I am willing to try
>it - but don't you guys think that the curve in the camera
>should be "correct". Has anyone heard if Nikon is going to
>update their own or release a revised firmware version where
>it is corrected? I don't have a problem trying to adjust the
>images myself but I am a little disturbed that Nikon could
>not get this very basic point figured out. Again, I am new
>to the d100 and still learning. I want to be able to point
>and shoot and be able to get prints of "snapshots" as well
>as having full creative control of my images - this is why I
>bought the camera afterall - but so far not being able to
>point, shoot, download and burn to cd, print (and have
>correct exposure) has me a little unsettled after paying
>$2,000 for a camera. As far as the images that I correct, I
>have no problem. I really like this camera, and I want to
>make it work for me.
>Sorry if I'm being a little long winded but I am a little
>Thanks for any replies....
I felt exactly the same, but after some 1000s of pictures I can now see the logic behind it. The problem is dynamic range. No image sensor can capture the dynamic range of light intensities in the real world. If the exposure is set for the brightest parts of the scene, then the darkest parts may well be lost. And vice-versa. Nothing can be done about it.
I think Nikon has set-up the camera for high contrast scenes. My consumer Olympus 3040 produces better *snapshots* overall, but it invariably does worse on the high-contrast scenes. This is what one would expect; the penalty for exposing for the middle of the histogram is that highlights will go white.
Going around with the D100 aperture permanently opened up by a smidge is just plain wrong; you will get brighter pictures, but the moment a highlight appears it will blow out. I've tried it; I don't like it.
Creating your own tone curve is the correct way forward. What you are doing is deciding where in the histogram you want the exposure to be set for. Because life isn't linear, I use a non-linear curve that not only moves the histogram to the right, but also moves the brighter pixels further. This really "lifts" low contrast scenes to a much more realistic appearance.
The next step is deciding which tone curve to use. This isn't any harder that switching white balance. The mental process is:
1. High contrast scene - use Nikon's conservative curve
2. Low contrast scene - use my own curve.
All that is happening here is that I am recognising that the camera has a limited dynamic range, and I use the curve best suited to the conditions. There is no right answer. If I get it wrong, I either get murky pictures or blown out pictures. It is easy to check this using the D100 sensor - it provides histogram & blow-out indication. I don't see this is any more of an issue than choosing the correct colour balance setting.
Film is different. Tone compensation in the camera is impossible, so the only option is to set the exposure for the middle of range and let the photgrapher do the rest with lights, flash, brollies, white cards etc. Digital is actually more powerful in this respect, because we can "choose" an infinite variety of film types, from low to high contrast. Seen from this perspective, the digital one-size-fits-all approach is naive, because choice of film has *always* been an issue for photographers.
We can now turn the situation on its head. Nikon, intentionally or otherwise, has provided us with an infinite number of film types. If you are working indoors with lighting use one film. Outdoors in sunlight, use another. Outdoors with cloud and vegetation, use a third. Quick and dirty snapshots, use another. We shouldn't regard the digital sensor as a one-size-fits-all sensor - it doesn't work well that way.
I can easily use NC3 to set the camera up to to produce decent snaps. Sure, it will blow the occasional highlight, and I'll need to reduce exposure or fiddle with the lighting. But that has always been necessary with film.
I think where Nikon has failed is
1. They should have explained all this and made a feature out of it, so everyone would go "Ooooh" and "Aaaaah" and buy the D100 *because* it has this capability.
2. They should have provided better default tone curves - as far as I can see, the "High" and "Low" settings aren't as useful as they could be. I can do better. Three custom curves and custom setting via the free Nikon View software would have really made this a "must have" selling point IMHO.
So in summary, there is no "right" answer. There are infinitely many "right" answers (or conversely, infinitely many wrong answers). Nikon made a choice, and it isn't a poor choice, but it is a counter-intuitive choice for many purchasers. It is easy to make your own choice, and try it out. If you do this under a wide range of light conditions you will discover what I have - that there isn't one right answer that copes with everything. If it turns out that Fuji or Kodak or Canon have sensors with a wider dynamic range then that is a very different situation, but at the present time I do not see anyone claiming this. I suspect they simply made differing choices, and each choice will have positive aspects and negative aspects.
PS - I think testing the dynamic range of the various prosumer cameras would be a worthwhile exercise to see if my hypothesis is correct.
#11. "RE: D100: Under Exposing By 1" | In response to Reply # 8douglasck Registered since 03rd Oct 2002Fri 04-Oct-02 11:13 AM
Do you consistantly use the same curve as a custom tone setting inside the camera? Or do you do manually during post-production?
I've tried building my own based on the http://www5e.biglobe.ne.jp/~komin/curve/curveeng.htm website, but I have yet to find a setting I like, but I had not made the high-low contrast correlation. Nor am I completely happy with the +ev solutions.
Anyways, if you do use the same curve, any chance of getting you to save it and post/email the curve file?
#14. "RE: D100: Under Exposing By 1" | In response to Reply # 11Valkeerie Registered since 30th Aug 2002Fri 04-Oct-02 11:50 AM
>Do you consistantly use the same curve as a custom tone
>setting inside the camera? Or do you do manually during
>I've tried building my own based on the
>website, but I have yet to find a setting I like, but I had
>not made the high-low contrast correlation. Nor am I
>completely happy with the +ev solutions.
>Anyways, if you do use the same curve, any chance of getting
>you to save it and post/email the curve file?
There isn't any magic to these curves. Take a picture, load it into Nikon Capure 3, adjust it till it looks right, then load the curve into the camera. When you are in that situation again, use that curve.
I have a curve I set up for low contrast situations, but it really is subjective. I like the Macbeth colour chart approach described by another poster in another discussion. The result of that exercise is going to depend on the colour temperature of the lighting and the colour balance of the monitor, so I don't see any point in swapping these things around. At some point I would like to get my own colour chart to play with.
Have you noticed that the camera is completely controllable in NC3? That means it is possible to adjust all the settings and take pictures while the camera is connected to the computer. You can set up a still-life, point the camera at it, and fiddle with all the settings (including tone curve) to get a result on the monitor that exactly matches what you see with your eyes. It won't be right for every situation, but it does suggest how to create tone curves for differing situations.
Also, before worrying excessivly about tone curves one must also understand (at some level):
- printer gamuts
- monitor gamuts
- monitor adjustment(really important)
- colour spaces
which all impact the finished result.
When dealing with complicated technology, play is really important. That is why kids learn to use computers so quickly - they aren't afraid to play, and fiddle with everything, and make lots of mistakes. The great thing about digital is that play costs nothing but time.
#9. "RE: D100: Under Exposing By 1" | In response to Reply # 0
I think my lack of problem with this issue is that I resigned myself to post-processing everything myself, right from the beginning. In fact that was a choice I made in the mode I use. I always shoot in RAW mode, so I have enough dynamic range in the image to accomplish what I need, at least in the majority of cases.
People say, "Hey, I don't want to post-processes the hundreds, thousands, millions of shots I have taken." Well, my answer to this is:
Only post-process the keepers!
#10. "RE: D100: Under Exposing By 1" | In response to Reply # 9Fri 04-Oct-02 10:54 AM
I dont have my D100 in front of me so let me ask: is there a setting on the D100 to adjust the exposure for Flash and For non - Flash shots? I'm pretty sure, I have not seen a setting for non-flash shots.
Give me my D2Hs and 50mm 1.4, then step out of my way.
#12. "RE: D100: Under Exposing By 1" | In response to Reply # 10Fri 04-Oct-02 11:28 AM
Here is a graphical view. It took me 18 hours to prepare it, but YOU are worth it! I know that it has only been a few minutes since you asked this, but, you see, I have a time compression chamber that works a bit like JPEG compression. Of course, when I come out of it, I feel somewhat less colorful and sharp!
#13. "RE: D100: Under Exposing By 1" | In response to Reply # 12Fri 04-Oct-02 11:41 AM
darrell you the man! So let me make sure I have this straight. If I up the exposure by +1 and leave the Flash compensation as is then my photos should turn our AOK since I am noticing a in Nikon View that they are under exposed by 1.
However, what happens when I'm taking a Flash shot? For instance let's say I'm taking a shot indoors and nead the Flash. Would I Flash compensat by +1 as well?
Give me my D2Hs and 50mm 1.4, then step out of my way.
#15. "RE: D100: Under Exposing By 1" | In response to Reply # 13Fri 04-Oct-02 11:51 AM
The flash and exposure compensations are two completely separate things. When you set them, they stay set, until you modify them again! I seem to get fairly accurate regular exposures, but have problems with slight (apparent) underexposure when using my SB-80DX. But, remember, this is ONLY apparent underexposure, unless you are shooting JPEG mode, in which it is REAL underexposure. Use RAW mode, and you will have enough dynamic range to adjust a bit in Photoshop for excellent results.
In other words, if you set exposure compensation, it does NOT affect flash compensation, and vice-versa.
Be careful about using too much exposure or flash compensation, since that will blow away your highlights. I have rarely ever needed 1 stop of compensation on regular exposures, and usually only about +0.7 EV in flash compensation. Experiment a bit, and see what you come up with. It is FREE after all!
#16. "RE: D100: Under Exposing By 1" | In response to Reply # 0
I have suffered from the same mental shock at just how different the fill flash system works compared to any of the film nikons I have used in the last 10 years.( F90x was slightly diffrent to F100)
I was expecting the jpegs to be much more usable out of the box. (As an aside I produced 8x12s from a portrait at the 3 jpeg compressions and the client couldn't pick between them )
I don't mind that much that you need to dial the camera in to your own tastes, it makes you feel a bit more in control that way, but it seems to respond to various lenses in a different way. Some of my lenses shoot nicely at no fill comp with others needing between + 0.5 to 1.5 . It will become second nature in time but it does create one more variable that can be missed in the heat of the moment.
As quoted at least experimenting only costs time....