• IliahBorgpanorama_fish_eye
    976 posts
    2 years ago

    Do you know what's on that histogram? How does it change if the subject is blue? red?

  • JimKassonpanorama_fish_eye
    1738 posts
    2 years ago

    I did not say your greens are clipped. Please stop misquoting me.

    A7M01251-Full-7028x4688.png

    Yes, if your in-camera WB is set fairly green you'll have an in-camera histogram that better approximates the raw histogram. This is called UniWB, and Iliah was the first to publicize it, and maybe the first to do it, almost 20 years ago.

    A7M01251-Full-7028x4688.png

    PNG, 99.1 KB, uploaded by JimKasson 2 years ago.

  • DeletedRemoved user
    2 years ago

    The image now under discussion:

    pixies II.jpg

    However, looking at the vignetting, I'd sell the camera or lens or both ... yes, Straw Man, I know!

    pixies II.jpg

    JPG, 344.2 KB, uploaded by xpatUSA 2 years ago.

  • DonaldBpanorama_fish_eye
    2378 posts
    2 years ago

    Stop being pedantic ,you know exactly what i meant.

  • DonaldBpanorama_fish_eye
    2378 posts
    2 years ago

    I just tested it and it works perfectly. it shifted the RGB histogram to match the Fast Raw Viewer. but FRV is not displaying camera WB setting 🤨

  • JimKassonpanorama_fish_eye
    1738 posts
    2 years ago

    No, I don't. I said your raw greens were fine. What is your point?

  • DonaldBpanorama_fish_eye
    2378 posts
    2 years ago

    LOL what modern lens doesn't . i never see it as my cameras are always set for distortion and vignette correction.

  • DeletedRemoved user
    2 years ago

    It's called a rhetorical question and, in this case, a non-sequitur ... both often used by someone whose back is to the wall ...

  • DonaldBpanorama_fish_eye
    2378 posts
    2 years ago

    Dont understand your post and who it was referring to.

  • DeletedRemoved user
    2 years ago

    Donald probably doesn't know.

    In fact, his posts in this thread make one wonder if he even knows what a histogram is!

    Sorry, Donald.

  • IliahBorgpanorama_fish_eye
    976 posts
    2 years ago

    It does.

  • IliahBorgpanorama_fish_eye
    976 posts
    2 years ago

    As a matter of fact, it was my daughter Julia, after more than half a year of field testing, and with my permission.

  • JimKassonpanorama_fish_eye
    1738 posts
    2 years ago

    Thanks, Iliah.

  • IliahBorgpanorama_fish_eye
    976 posts
    2 years ago

    As if I can resist here :)

  • IliahBorgpanorama_fish_eye
    976 posts
    2 years ago

    My problem is that in-camera histograms don't help a raw shooter.
    I'm not sure a photographer needs to know what a histogram is to get a happy exposure ;)

  • JimKassonpanorama_fish_eye
    1738 posts
    2 years ago

    They're certainly not ideal in the present situation, but I still think they are helpful once you understand their limitations.

  • DeletedRemoved user
    2 years ago

    Come ON, Donald !!

    You said "cool so that means i can accurately set my auto wb against the RGB histogram ?"

    Iliah said "What???" and I responded to explain my view of your wacky statement.

    Must be hard ... (wink)

  • SrMipanorama_fish_eye
    457 posts
    2 years ago

    While in-camera histograms do not match the raw data, they can help prevent blown highlights in most cases. What they cannot help is pushing the exposure to its optimum. Being a stop conservative with exposure at base ISO is often good enough, though it would be nice if we could eke the last photon out of the scene.

    When higher ISOs are needed to maintain brightness, the noise visibility increases and the optimal exposure is more critical. In that case, we need the histogram to prevent highlight clipping by reducing ISO while keeping exposure as large as possible.