Nikon D700 Histograms vs CO5 Histograms
Hello,
I've consistently noticed that the histograms displayed on my D700 do not match those displayed in CO5 (or Photoshop CS4). I always shoot in RAW and have set my picture control to "neutral" believing that this will not pre-process my images in any way; however, the difference in histograms remains leading to sometimes under- or over-exposed shots in CO5 when the histogram on the D700 suggested this was not the case.
Is it the case that CO5 is applying some processing itself? Or is the camera at fault. I have recently read that the histograms (and image) displayed on the D700 (and other DSLRs) are not actually based on the RAW file but on the JPEG file, which of course means that some degree of pre-processing is occurring, even when shooting in RAW. Is this correct? If so, how might one set up the camera so that it shows a histogram display that is the same as that viewed in CO5.
Many thanks for all comments and advice.
Jose
I've consistently noticed that the histograms displayed on my D700 do not match those displayed in CO5 (or Photoshop CS4). I always shoot in RAW and have set my picture control to "neutral" believing that this will not pre-process my images in any way; however, the difference in histograms remains leading to sometimes under- or over-exposed shots in CO5 when the histogram on the D700 suggested this was not the case.
Is it the case that CO5 is applying some processing itself? Or is the camera at fault. I have recently read that the histograms (and image) displayed on the D700 (and other DSLRs) are not actually based on the RAW file but on the JPEG file, which of course means that some degree of pre-processing is occurring, even when shooting in RAW. Is this correct? If so, how might one set up the camera so that it shows a histogram display that is the same as that viewed in CO5.
Many thanks for all comments and advice.
Jose
0
-
What you basically observed is that each piece of software, either in your camera or on your computer, makes its own interpretation of the raw data. It is not primarily an issue of 'right or wrong', but just different. The histogram is not a representation of raw data but an interpretation of how this data would look like after a specific film curve, profile etc in the RGB space.
Because this might come as a shock a short survival guide: regarding exposure - because that's what it is all about, isn't it - teach yourself what histogram on the camera gives workable results (amount of clipping etc.) later up in your workflow (with Capture One for example).0 -
Thanks for the prompt reply Paul. You are of course correct; it is all about exposure, or rather exposure relative to the scene - sometimes you'll want an over- or under-exposed shot. And I take the point that each bit of software will translate the RAW file in a (slightly) different way, so it pays to be familiar with certain disparities between the camera and say CO. However, what surprises me is that it seems the histograms displayed on the camera back are not based on the RAW file but on the low-resolution JPEG version that is used to display the playback image. If this is correct, then not only should you not base your exposure on the image - this is a given - but you also cannot rely on your camera's playback data to set your optimal exposures. This would require a couple of steps of anticipation - camera RAW to low-res JPEG to CO - to accurately judge what will and won't work. 0 -
Maybe you can find out how to set up your camera's playback data to get the best reference for your CO workflow. Because camera settings like neutral and contrast etc do not affect the raw file, you are free to experiment without negatively affecting your work in CO. 0
Post is closed for comments.
Comments
3 comments