/ Register


  1. Welcome to Mu-43.com—a friendly Micro 4/3 camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

Exposure Difference Between Camera and Download

Discussion in 'Panasonic Cameras' started by Dogman, May 26, 2014.

Top Rated
  1. Dogman

    Dogman Mu-43 Veteran

    234
    Dec 23, 2012
    Maryland
    Okay, something is really baffling me. I normally don't use flash (almost always use natural lighting or tungsten lights). I tried taking some portraits with a GX7 in manual exposure mode with off-camera flash (Yongnuo 602 radio triggering a YN560III). The image looks fine in the camera on playback mode. But, when I download the image into Lightroom 5, the image is about 2 stops underexposed. I've spent a couple hours trying to figure out what is happening with no success. NOTE: I can fix the exposure in LR5, but I don't know why there is such a difference from what I see in camera and what is actually downloaded. I thought with digital in-camera images, what you see is what you get. I forgot mention that I shoot in RAW.
     
    Dogman, May 26, 2014
    #1
  2. b_rubenstein

    b_rubenstein Mu-43 All-Pro

    1,390
    Mar 20, 2012
    Melbourne, FL
    If the camera's LCD is brighter than your monitor then you wind up with your result. The only accurate way to judge exposure in the camera is to check the histogram and/or flashing highlights. You may be able to change the camera's LCD brightness to more accurately reflect the exposure, but it may be too dim in bright sunlight. Less of a problem if you use the EVF.
     
    b_rubenstein, May 26, 2014
    #2
  3. Dogman

    Dogman Mu-43 Veteran

    234
    Dec 23, 2012
    Maryland
    Thanks for your suggestion. I tried turning the Monitor Luminance and Monitor Display to their lowest settings on the GX7. It helps some, but the "underexposed" in-camera image is still slightly brighter than the image on my computer monitor. I'm also not sure why I don't notice this difference when I don't use flash. I also tried using the same "underexposed" settings (ISO, aperture and shutter speed) on my Canon DSLR, and I can clearly see the in-camera image is underexposed. Oh well, I thought it might be some quirkiness of the GX7.
     
    Dogman, May 26, 2014
    #3
  4. barry13

    barry13 Mu-43.com Editor; Photon Wrangler Subscribing Member

    7,814
    Mar 7, 2014
    Southern California
    Barry
    I've noticed my E-M1's RAW files look vastly different in different apps; it may just be the apps applying different automatic adjustments.

    Barry
     
    barry13, May 26, 2014
    #4
  5. Replytoken

    Replytoken Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    3,306
    May 7, 2012
    Puget Sound
    Ken
    Is your monitor on your computer calibrated?

    --Ken
     
    Replytoken, May 26, 2014
    #5
  6. T N Args

    T N Args Agent Photocateur

    3,361
    Dec 3, 2013
    Adelaide, Australia
    call me Arg
    Does the in-camera histogram look the same as the Lightroom histogram?

    Also, try shooting a RAW+JPEG test photo with flash, and compare the two files in Lightroom. Lightroom won't be doing anything to the JPEG, so, if the 2 files look much different, it is due to Lightroom's processing of RAW for the GX7.

    I have noticed that Lightroom is very primitive with processing RW2 files out of my GX7. For example, I have shot a test grey card in broad daylight onto RAW, and found the Camera As Shot colour temp in Lightroom is 4950K, which renders the grey card very close to grey (4750 yields true grey), yet if I choose Daylight WB in Lightroom it will apply 5500K and is much too yellow. Very poor. All the WB presets in Lightroom are unusable with the RW2 out of my GX7.
     
    T N Args, May 26, 2014
    #6
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Dogman

    Dogman Mu-43 Veteran

    234
    Dec 23, 2012
    Maryland
    I followed your suggestion and took a RAW + JPEG shot using the underexposed settings that looks fine in-camera. And, sure enough, the downloaded JPEG image looks fine (exposure wise) on the computer monitor while the RAW image looks about 1.25 stops underexposed on the computer monitor. So, you're definitely on to something in noticing that LR doesn't do a very good job with processing Panasonic RW2 files out of the GX7. However, the JPEG image was way too red (In my selfie, I looked sunburned). As I noted, the underexposed image can be fixed in LR, but I would prefer to get the exposure right the first time. Thanks for your help.
     
    Dogman, May 27, 2014
    #7
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Replytoken

    Replytoken Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    3,306
    May 7, 2012
    Puget Sound
    Ken
    Do you have any presets that are being applied to the raw files on import into LR?

    --Ken
     
    Replytoken, May 27, 2014
    #8
  9. Dogman

    Dogman Mu-43 Veteran

    234
    Dec 23, 2012
    Maryland
    No, I don't apply presets to RAW files during import.
     
    Dogman, May 27, 2014
    #9
  10. Replytoken

    Replytoken Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    3,306
    May 7, 2012
    Puget Sound
    Ken
    You might want to run this by the folks at www.lightroomforums.net . It is a friendly forum, and there are a number of folks who are quite good at troubleshooting. I know that some of the older 12MP Panasonic raw files had a reputation for bad WB issues on import, but it was my understanding that the GX7 was greatly improved.

    Also what version of LR5 are you using? Several of the earlier versions had some known bugs that would crop up in a variety of ways. And, did you have this issue in LR4?

    --Ken
     
    Replytoken, May 27, 2014
    #10
  11. T N Args

    T N Args Agent Photocateur

    3,361
    Dec 3, 2013
    Adelaide, Australia
    call me Arg
    Although, with respect to exposure, I must say I have no trouble at all. The jpeg out of my GX7 and the RW2 I see in Lightroom have almost exactly the same exposure levels, looking at the histogram.

    Also, if I recall, you only have the issue with flash photos? That's the bit that confuses me! Have you tried the same RAW+JPEG test with no flash, and compared the two files in Lightroom to see if they are also different?
     
    T N Args, May 28, 2014
    #11
  12. Dogman

    Dogman Mu-43 Veteran

    234
    Dec 23, 2012
    Maryland
    When the image is properly exposed, both the JPEG and RW2 images will look the same on the computer monitor.

    I thought about why this problem shows up only in flash pictures. My guess is that when I shoot using manual exposure mode under continuous lighting (which is almost all the time), I can easily adjust the aperture and shutter speed in-camera before the shot to get a decent exposure. But, with off-camera flash, I can't see the proper exposure in-camera before the shot, and I don't have a flash meter. So, I take a trial shot first with a best-guess at the aperture and shutter speed, and then I rely on the image displayed on the camera monitor to adjust the exposure, accordingly. The problem that we are discussing is that the image looks fine on the camera monitor, but is underexposed in LR.

    And, yes I am using the latest version of LR (Version 5.4).
     
    Dogman, May 28, 2014
    #12
  13. Dan Ka

    Dan Ka Mu-43 Regular

    129
    Jan 11, 2011
    Northeastern Ohio
    The camera lcd shows the jpg embedded in the raw file. It is very possible that the jpg and the raw look different on the computer. If they look the same then either you nailed the raw to meet the jpg or your computer software is showing the embedded jpg. So you will need to check the settings - FastStone viewer and Irfanview will show the embedded jpg unless otherwise configured. There are programs that extract the jpg from the raw file, one of them is Instant JPEG from RAW from mtapesdesign.com which I have been using.
     
    Dan Ka, May 31, 2014
    #13
  14. T N Args

    T N Args Agent Photocateur

    3,361
    Dec 3, 2013
    Adelaide, Australia
    call me Arg
    Have you turned off the Auto Exposure Comp sub-menu under the Flash menu? That may well fix it.
     
    T N Args, Jun 1, 2014
    #14
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Accept Learn More...