Should you still expose RAW images to the right, or avoid clipping highlights?
Asked 10/28/2015
3 views
2 answers
0
I usually err on the side of underexposing slightly to protect skies and avoid blown highlights, especially in landscape photography. I’ve read about “expose to the right” (ETTR), which says RAW files can hold more useful tonal information in the brighter parts of the exposure, so a slightly brighter exposure may give cleaner results when edited later in Lightroom or Camera Raw.
Is ETTR still a good approach with modern RAW workflows? And if so, when does it help versus when should you prioritize protecting highlights? Also, why do digital cameras seem to record tonal data in a way that favors brighter values rather than distributing it evenly across shadows and highlights?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
10y ago
2 Answers
2
There is a common misunderstanding with the technique described (which is generally dubbed 'expose to the right'), as far as I understand it.
You can find a detailed description at wikipedia, to see if the techniaues are the same:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exposing_to_the_right
However, the benefit of this techique mostly applies for images that are of lower contrast. If you have high contrast, it is always and without a doubt, lost information as soon as you clip highlights, while you will still get something from underexposed areas.
For landscape photography, the right way to tackle this problem however, would be graduated neutral density filters (or exposure bracketing). Here are two links for further input:
Ken Rockwell (hate him or hate him a bit):
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/grads.htm
bracketing vs. ND grads
http://shuttermuse.com/why-sold-my-graduated-neutral-density-filter/
Originally by user45637. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user45637
10y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
Yes—ETTR is still a real concept for RAW, but it’s often misunderstood. The idea is to expose as brightly as possible without clipping important highlights, because brighter tonal values generally contain more usable signal and can produce cleaner shadows when processed later.
But for high-contrast scenes, especially landscapes with bright skies, protecting highlights is usually more important. Once highlights are clipped, that detail is gone; slightly dark shadows often still retain recoverable information. So ETTR is most useful in lower-contrast scenes where you can push exposure rightward without blowing highlights.
For difficult landscape contrast, better solutions are graduated ND filters or exposure bracketing rather than simply overexposing.
As for why brighter areas get more tonal precision: image capture is fundamentally tied to the amount of light recorded. Higher signal levels naturally allow finer gradation above the noise floor, so shadows are more limited and noisier. Some RAW formats may also compress tonal values nonlinearly, which can further affect how data is distributed, but the key practical takeaway is: expose as bright as you safely can, without clipping important highlights.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI10y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
How should I read the histogram for dark scenes like concerts or night cityscapes?
When should you expose to protect highlights versus brighten the exposure for cleaner shadows?
How can I expose to the right with a DSLR if the meter targets 18% gray?
Why does ETTR with digital prioritize highlights, unlike exposing negative film for the shadows?
Why does my camera histogram differ from Lightroom for the same RAW photo?