Raw Histogram??

Ok, thank you for that 🙂

So in the future if I posted something like "....contemporary camera meters are calibrated to output ~12.5% grey image lightness....", would you be comfortable with that?

Because your definition of "underexpose" is different from the most common one (making image darker).

In a beginners environment imo it is even more important to use the correct terms to describe things. Using different meanings for a word depending on the context can only lead to confusion and misconceptions for beginners.

Sounds more cut and dried than it is. Maybe Iliah could give you a range.

I do not see how that helps in general situations. After setting you exposure manually and the metering system sets ISO below the limit, the metering system may have selected an ISO value that will cause clipping. Maybe always running with -2EC (applied on ISO only) could prevent most clipping, but setting max ISO can't.

Hopefully he can.

As a "Plan B" would you be comfortable with "....contemporary camera meters are calibrated to output a firmware set image lightness...."?

Maybe we should avoid using the term under- or overexposure and instead use darkening/brightening.

Sure. If we're not talking about matrix metering and such.

just did the test and the A74 and XZ1 histograms maxed out showed the identical exposure. thats awesome. the olympus playback RGB histogram is unbelevabley detailed.

Yes, Yes, Yes 🤗🤗🤗🤗🤗🤗🤗🤗😎

That is exactly what I advise people to do and what I actually do in my posts. I say an image is too dark or too light or it needs to be darkened or lightened etc etc.

If I ever use "under exposed" in any of my posts it is as per the definition in my signature and is why I include the signature for the sake of clarity in my posts.

* exposure - amount of light that struck the sensor per unit area while the shutter was open
** optimal exposure - the maximum exposure* within dof and motion blur requirements without clipping important highlights.
*** under exposed - more exposure* could have been added with the DOF and blur constraints still being met without clipping important highlights.

not unless i see images of the rear LCD screens and raw histogram im not convinced.

Ok, thank you for that 🙂 but in the overwhelming majority of the photos I take I use matrix/evaluative metering and it works well for me. Why doesn't it apply to matrix/evaluative metering?

blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/histogram-example-normal-contrast-scene/

blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/histograms-low-contrast-scene-with-specular-highlight/

blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/histograms-high-contrast-scene/

not a sony camera, as you quoted.

OM-1 is calibrated to less than 7%, that's slightly less than 4 stops down from clipping.

I have proposed that over and underexposure be qualified. For example, underexposed one stop from the exposure that results from metering a gray card.

I've sold all my Sony cameras.

You've seen that Adobe are adding 0.35 EV lightness to raw files from your camera to compensate. You've seen that if a scene contains a significant patch of saturated colour (red, for example) the histogram shows clipping where there is none.