You will find that with the Olympus system that you don't need to ETTR because the system is very strong at retaining shadow detail without noise - in fact stronger than your old FF system. However, the OM-D system is NOT so strong at the highlight end and I'm always very careful not to crush the highlights. As long as I have no pure black, then I'll take a left-hand-bias histogram everyday of the week so that I know I've protected highlight detail.
Also just as info for all, your histogram is based on the jpeg image. Raw on micro 4/3 has 1 stop extra head room so if you have an image with lots of important dark areas that is clipped or close to it you can clip your whites to when hilight warning just starts to show give 2/3 more exposure and your hi lights on your raw image will still be good. This gives about 1 extra stop to your darks Your jpeg will be blown hilights so don’t try this if you just shoot jpeg only
It's important to note, that in Olympus HiRes modes, the highlights are more subject to clipping. If you spot meter the brightest place in your scene, you can go 2.7 stops above zero and maintain detail in the highlights. HiRez modes will show adequate detail in the shadows.
I used to do that when shooting landscapes back in the day. Now I mostly shoot street photography in Raw and jpeg. Hardly ever bother with the Raw files anymore. Shadows are shadows. Our eyes look for the bright parts in photo’s and clipped shadows just add to the drama. We all have our own style of shooting of course so I understand why this method can be useful.
I expose to the right also to avoid lifting shadows turning into mud if I need to lift them. Peter the guy in Finland made a video tutorial with Olympus how to turn on the clipping of shadows and highlights so you can see it in live view.
Chris, keep up the good work on the videos. They are really well presented and thought out and its pleasing to see your enjoying the micro 4/3 system. I switched from canon full frame 3 years ago and people thought i was daft, but i think the system is underated in terms of what it offers everyone and it produces surprisingly good results. Lets just hope OM doesnt let the side down in relation to investment and firmware updates for the OM1Mk2 and Mk3.
I’m thinking of grabbing the OM1 at some point to see what a real high end Olympus camera has to offers. Thanks for watching Jon I appreciate the support!
@@ChrisBaitsonPhoto I own the OM-1, and the OM-D mk3. Unless you want to do wildlife photography, like fast moving birds, I don't see any reason to prefer the OM-1. In fact, the arrangement of controls on the Mk3 and ergonomics are superior, in my opinion. I pick up the Mk 3 more often. One big plus in the OM-1 though, is the sensibly restructured MENUS! Both cameras have much the same computational photography abilities.
Hi.. I usually Ettr too. May i give you a trick… F9 for m43 is a little bit High..(can cause some diffraction) Your image will be better if you play around f5.6 and f6.3 .the usual m43 sweet spot
i work mostly with exposed to the right because the sensor of my panasonic g9 can recover highlights significant better than shadow and because the dynamic range is limited on our sensorsize, so it is not the most important thing, that some little pieces of the sky are blowned out, but i can save the shadows for it!
Hiya, I have just found your channel and I am enjoying your videos. It is Interesting for me as an APSC user to see you are offering 36 inch prints on your shop 🤔 Subbed.
In my experience, it completely depends on the scene and what you're trying to achieve. There are cases where overexposure works (even well beyond a simple ETTR approach), just as there are times when significant underexposure is necessary to get the right result. Shadow detail's generally a lot easier to recover than blown-out highlights, so it you're trying to maximize DR, it may well be better to back off on the ETTR concept. NR tech (at least from DxO and Topaz) has evolved to the point where noise is no longer an issue (although you can lose some shadow detail, especially with ISO >6400, although such detail's often unimportant in such images and it may print better as pure black). Obviously, one must shoot RAW to have any chance of saving marginally-exposed areas. BtW, I recently got the Laowa 6mm f/2.0 and would highly recommend that lens, as in addition to the ~120° AoV, it takes (58mm) filters, can focus ridiculously close, and other than wide-open (where you can get some great bokeh), you can get great 10-point sunstars if there are any specular highlights in the frame, plus although it's MF, aperture's camera-driven, so you get EXIF data. I thought my Leica 8-18 was wide enough, but there are things I can do with that Laowa that are otherwise impossible.
The camera has no idea of whether your subject is dark or light, it tries to get something that "might work." Consequently, it often over exposes or under exposes. I do similar to you, but in M for manual. You are getting the correct exposure, the one that gives you most opportunities in post.
I’ve printed 24x32 with very small details in the image and it is perfectly sharp ,this at 16 mp. I do my own printing and sell prints and micro 4/3 has never been an issue. The only issue is when people pixel peep at 100 or 200% as that does show a difference on screen to FF but when you actually print even at large sizes the differences are very minimal
For me overexposing and underexposing will be depend on the situation. I tried to overexposed my photos during bright sunny day with a bright color object(like yellow) and it didnt went good😅
I suppose it depends on the conditions. This isn’t something I would do in harsh light that’s for sure, but for this early morning stuff it works well.
If you expose further to the right surely that means having to pull back highlights more to recover detail in the sky which for some systems is much harder to do than lift shadows. I know I have found that from my own shooting.
It’s not an issue I’ve ever come across in all honesty. I’ve always been able to get what I want from the skies. It was always the shadows I had problems with.
@@ChrisBaitsonPhoto you ever shot with a Leica? I guarantee you that you would definitely find the opposite 😂 maybe it's just system specific but I have shot a few different systems and yes can recover in most scenarios but I always found lifting shadows easier than recovering highlights or at least to a level I was happy with, I'd rather a bit of noise than those obvious highlight recovery effects I see on many landscape shots.
I’ve never used one no. I found with Fuji that recovering highlights lead to to wiggly wormy type of halo effect but that’s the only system I’ve used where I’ve come across it, outside of the odd dodgy HDR merge of course.
@@ChrisBaitsonPhoto yeah fujifilm isn't great either. I think the concept is great that you show here if your system is more inclined to work how this Olympus one does but I try to keep my highlights as low as possible as I know I'll have a better time in post production. Benefits of learning your camera system I suppose.
It is a technique that I've been using for years but I object to it being refered to as "over exposing". It is correctly exposing as it maximises the data gathered when the button is pressed - as can be proved with number theory.
TBH, I am not convinced with this exposing to the right argument. The achilles heel of all digital cameras, regardless of sensor size, is their limited ability to retrieve data from highlights, while they can easily deal with near black shadows. I would still like to protect the highlights where possible. If you were shooting colour or B&W film, the argument of shooting to the right of the histogram ( we didn't have such luxuries all those years ago, LOL ), or giving extra exopure, would have made more sense as film is not that strong in holding shadow detail if severly underexposed.
Is this a technique you’ll find useful?
Short sweet and interesting and to the point of what we want
You will find that with the Olympus system that you don't need to ETTR because the system is very strong at retaining shadow detail without noise - in fact stronger than your old FF system. However, the OM-D system is NOT so strong at the highlight end and I'm always very careful not to crush the highlights. As long as I have no pure black, then I'll take a left-hand-bias histogram everyday of the week so that I know I've protected highlight detail.
Also just as info for all, your histogram is based on the jpeg image. Raw on micro 4/3 has 1 stop extra head room so if you have an image with lots of important dark areas that is clipped or close to it you can clip your whites to when hilight warning just starts to show give 2/3 more exposure and your hi lights on your raw image will still be good. This gives about 1 extra stop to your darks Your jpeg will be blown hilights so don’t try this if you just shoot jpeg only
Thanks for the input Micheal. Solid advice.
It's important to note, that in Olympus HiRes modes, the highlights are more subject to clipping. If you spot meter the brightest place in your scene, you can go 2.7 stops above zero and maintain detail in the highlights. HiRez modes will show adequate detail in the shadows.
I used to do that when shooting landscapes back in the day. Now I mostly shoot street photography in Raw and jpeg. Hardly ever bother with the Raw files anymore. Shadows are shadows. Our eyes look for the bright parts in photo’s and clipped shadows just add to the drama.
We all have our own style of shooting of course so I understand why this method can be useful.
You're right, everyone has their own way. This is something that works for me, but I understand it may not be for everyone!
Man. I love your videos. keep going :)
Thank you. Appreciate it.
I expose to the right also to avoid lifting shadows turning into mud if I need to lift them. Peter the guy in Finland made a video tutorial with Olympus how to turn on the clipping of shadows and highlights so you can see it in live view.
Yeah I turned it on for mine, it’s buried in the menu and you really have to look for it. Helpful feature!
Great video Chris! Love the pic of the tree roots! I will have to try a polarizer 😊
Thanks Matt!
Chris, keep up the good work on the videos. They are really well presented and thought out and its pleasing to see your enjoying the micro 4/3 system. I switched from canon full frame 3 years ago and people thought i was daft, but i think the system is underated in terms of what it offers everyone and it produces surprisingly good results. Lets just hope OM doesnt let the side down in relation to investment and firmware updates for the OM1Mk2 and Mk3.
I’m thinking of grabbing the OM1 at some point to see what a real high end Olympus camera has to offers. Thanks for watching Jon I appreciate the support!
@@ChrisBaitsonPhoto I own the OM-1, and the OM-D mk3. Unless you want to do wildlife photography, like fast moving birds, I don't see any reason to prefer the OM-1. In fact, the arrangement of controls on the Mk3 and ergonomics are superior, in my opinion. I pick up the Mk 3 more often. One big plus in the OM-1 though, is the sensibly restructured MENUS! Both cameras have much the same computational photography abilities.
I've never tried overexposing that much. Going to try that. Thanks for the tip, Chris! ;)
It made me want to do long exposures again. Great video.
Hi.. I usually Ettr too.
May i give you a trick… F9 for m43 is a little bit High..(can cause some diffraction) Your image will be better if you play around f5.6 and f6.3 .the usual m43 sweet spot
Thanks for the comment Vladimir. I’ve had a lot of comments about diffraction at apertures 9-11 on MFT. Could you explain your thinking here?
Hi mate just got on to your videos stunning photos mate tops 📸📸📸📸📸
Cool to see you using the Ulanzi Colman as well, I picked one up last year. We're now inseparable, it's a really clever piece of kit.
It’s actually a really good tripod. Need to make a video on it for them this week though as part of the deal.
@@ChrisBaitsonPhoto lol, I actually did one as my first foray into vlogging. It was awful and will never see the light of day!
i work mostly with exposed to the right because the sensor of my panasonic g9 can recover highlights significant better than shadow and because the dynamic range is limited on our sensorsize, so it is not the most important thing, that some little pieces of the sky are blowned out, but i can save the shadows for it!
Hiya, I have just found your channel and I am enjoying your videos. It is Interesting for me as an APSC user to see you are offering 36 inch prints on your shop 🤔
Subbed.
Great video!
Thanks man.
In my experience, it completely depends on the scene and what you're trying to achieve. There are cases where overexposure works (even well beyond a simple ETTR approach), just as there are times when significant underexposure is necessary to get the right result. Shadow detail's generally a lot easier to recover than blown-out highlights, so it you're trying to maximize DR, it may well be better to back off on the ETTR concept. NR tech (at least from DxO and Topaz) has evolved to the point where noise is no longer an issue (although you can lose some shadow detail, especially with ISO >6400, although such detail's often unimportant in such images and it may print better as pure black). Obviously, one must shoot RAW to have any chance of saving marginally-exposed areas.
BtW, I recently got the Laowa 6mm f/2.0 and would highly recommend that lens, as in addition to the ~120° AoV, it takes (58mm) filters, can focus ridiculously close, and other than wide-open (where you can get some great bokeh), you can get great 10-point sunstars if there are any specular highlights in the frame, plus although it's MF, aperture's camera-driven, so you get EXIF data. I thought my Leica 8-18 was wide enough, but there are things I can do with that Laowa that are otherwise impossible.
The camera has no idea of whether your subject is dark or light, it tries to get something that "might work." Consequently, it often over exposes or under exposes. I do similar to you, but in M for manual. You are getting the correct exposure, the one that gives you most opportunities in post.
I also shoot in M for Manual. It's a technique that works well for me.
long exposure shots can you use auto iso?
I wouldn’t, it’ll keep increasing the ISO as you slow the shutter.
@@ChrisBaitsonPhoto good to know , long exposure isn’t something I’ve really done but as I wait on the Olympus coming I’m gonna use it for such shots
do you think you have to spend as much on filters / im just started off so lots to buy but i dont wanna buy twice ? tia
Just buy one filter kit and step up rings to fit your lenses. Saves on cost in the long run.
Simple rule in computer science: it's always easier to take out, than add in.
That my friend is a great way to explain it.
Nice one 👍
Thanks Glen.
What are the biggest prints you made with your M43 gear?
I have some 12x16s available.
Check yout Keith Cooper. His photos are mostly about printing, and he has made some enormous prints.
I’ve printed 24x32 with very small details in the image and it is perfectly sharp ,this at 16 mp. I do my own printing and sell prints and micro 4/3 has never been an issue. The only issue is when people pixel peep at 100 or 200% as that does show a difference on screen to FF but when you actually print even at large sizes the differences are very minimal
One of the reasons I opted to swap over. Real terms the differences are minimal.
Have you tried live Nd with the Olympus? I've captured some great sea landscapes photos using it.
My camera doesn’t have the live ND feature I’m afraid. Which is a shame as I’d love to try that out.
For me overexposing and underexposing will be depend on the situation. I tried to overexposed my photos during bright sunny day with a bright color object(like yellow) and it didnt went good😅
I suppose it depends on the conditions. This isn’t something I would do in harsh light that’s for sure, but for this early morning stuff it works well.
You mean it didn't go well.
Enjoying your channel. Still in love with Olympus?
I am mate. Has done everything I’ve asked of it.
@@ChrisBaitsonPhoto they great cameras
Ha! I know that accent. Lovely snaps :)
You local to me?
@@ChrisBaitsonPhoto Sure am, I'm naff with a camera but I'm trying!
If you expose further to the right surely that means having to pull back highlights more to recover detail in the sky which for some systems is much harder to do than lift shadows. I know I have found that from my own shooting.
It’s not an issue I’ve ever come across in all honesty. I’ve always been able to get what I want from the skies. It was always the shadows I had problems with.
@@ChrisBaitsonPhoto you ever shot with a Leica? I guarantee you that you would definitely find the opposite 😂 maybe it's just system specific but I have shot a few different systems and yes can recover in most scenarios but I always found lifting shadows easier than recovering highlights or at least to a level I was happy with, I'd rather a bit of noise than those obvious highlight recovery effects I see on many landscape shots.
I’ve never used one no. I found with Fuji that recovering highlights lead to to wiggly wormy type of halo effect but that’s the only system I’ve used where I’ve come across it, outside of the odd dodgy HDR merge of course.
@@ChrisBaitsonPhoto yeah fujifilm isn't great either. I think the concept is great that you show here if your system is more inclined to work how this Olympus one does but I try to keep my highlights as low as possible as I know I'll have a better time in post production. Benefits of learning your camera system I suppose.
Chris is not over exposing, he's judging the exposure from the histogram. The correct exposure just avoids the clipping that concerns you.
It is a technique that I've been using for years but I object to it being refered to as "over exposing". It is correctly exposing as it maximises the data gathered when the button is pressed - as can be proved with number theory.
TBH, I am not convinced with this exposing to the right argument. The achilles heel of all digital cameras, regardless of sensor size, is their limited ability to retrieve data from highlights, while they can easily deal with near black shadows. I would still like to protect the highlights where possible. If you were shooting colour or B&W film, the argument of shooting to the right of the histogram ( we didn't have such luxuries all those years ago, LOL ), or giving extra exopure, would have made more sense as film is not that strong in holding shadow detail if severly underexposed.