Thread 4458875

Noob here. Do you use edit or use different settings for sunny or overcast days?
My camera has three C settings on the PASM wheel that I plan to use like C1 - sunny, C2 - overcast, C3 - monochrome. I do very little post-processing and plan to keep it that way.
So should I bump the contrast on overcast days? Or change the histogram?

>>4458875 (OP)
>Do you use edit or use different settings for sunny or overcast days?
I use M-mode for everything. In scenes with high dynamic range, like photos taken on sunny days with some direct sunlight and some shade, I get the highlights correctly exposed and edit the shadows later. On overcast days there isn’t much to worry about except getting enough light.
>So should I bump the contrast on overcast days?
Shoot in RAW format and you can make that decision in post-processing.
>Or change the histogram?
You can use the histogram as an after-the-fact metre. Lots of pixels clumped to the right-hand side, some even clipped off? Your image is overexposed. Same but on the left-hand side? It’s underexposed. This may not be the perfect approach but, as long as i see no clipping on the histogram, I call it acceptable and move on. I can usually adjust exposure as much as I want/need to in post if nothing is clipped. Please consult the graph. In my opinion, the ETTL, neutral and ETTR histograms are all acceptable. Consult >>4450154 for autism on which of these three histograms in particular should be your “bullseye.”

>>4458885
Another anon. Most camera settings except the exposure triangle are post-processing of the raw, right? White balance, curves, stuff like that.

>>4458875 (OP)
test

>>4458875 (OP)
Definitely worth keeping in mind, and consider that most cameras will also do similar processing adjustments when on fully auto / scene modes. If the engineers have it set up that way for beginners, probably something there. At the very least, WB should be different, but contrast and even saturation are also worth thinking about.
But, I also just shoot RAW in M mode and decide my processing in post. All my images end up on my computer anyways, and it's not any effort to click a button and slap on a preset. I've had too many shots from my "JPG only" era that I wish I could go back and edit with what I know and like now.
>>4458889
For the most part, yes. There are some weird ones that might affect how the RAW itself is captured, like Fuji's DR100-400 settings.
I think in some rare cases lens profile related corrections might also get "baked in", separate from lens corrections available in the RAW processor, but I'm not 100% sure.
Anything like what you've mentioned, yes.

>>4458889
Depends, but with every camera I've used the only settings other than exposure that gets baked into RAWs is WB and long-exposure NR (aka a dark frame). If your camera supports it you can also choose to bake in things like exposure stacks into one RAW which is technically a bunch of frames but still in RAW format, but overall the list of things should be very short.

>>4458875 (OP)
only for me is quite simply
>overcast or midday sun
black and white
>everything else
color

>>4458928
What cameras are you using that WB gets baked in?

>>4458979
Maybe baked in isnt the right term considering you can freely change it while in RAW format after the fact.
Perhaps just saying the WB influences the RAW file output is better.

>>4458945
I tend to use mono when it gets dark and crank the ISO. I do love sunshine colour though.

I plan to increase contrast and saturation for my overcast setting and leave it always on AWB.

>>4458990
I think my camera stores WB value in the raw, so that raw editors can pick it up as a default. I assumed all cameras would do this.

>>4458990
With baked in we mean as part of the raw data itself, not a flag for a setting that a raw processor uses
A big point of shooting RAW is to change stuff like WB because it explicitly isn't baked in
>>4458995
Most do, and most also inherit which color profiles you use too