Exposure compensation in camera vs exposure adjusting in Lightroom or Photoshop

If you use exposure compensation in camera or make the adjustments in Photoshop or Lightroom is there any difference?

EV comp in the camera does adjust the actual exposure (hopefully for the better). This also adjusts the deepest blacks and brightest highlights the image will record. EV comp with an editor shifts the image tones. So if you use -EV comp in an editor to make the image darker, this also shifts the deepest tones below solid black. Those tones are lost. (Of course this is not strictly true for RAW, but that is another conversation). So EV comp in the editor reduces the dynamic range of the image, while EV comp in the camera does not.

Kelly Cook

So you've gotten the point that I was after. I was looking to see if you waited to fixing exposure in post production if doing so here was destructive in any way to the photos data. So if JPG there is possibility and RAW not the case?

Well from my understanding RAW does keep EC settings since they affect the exposure, or are actually part of the base data when you open them. The other data such as your say picture controls for the Jpegs are not in there, but EC is metering control not applied pre-processing. So getting the exposure right through EC is still needed. If you shoot Manual then you are applying EC when you over or under expose an image, with EC you have tweaked the Meter to do that automatically. You can also do it when shooting manually by say setting a - EC so that when you center the meter reading it actually is under exposing. Using software to heavily or having to use it too heavily, will crush your blacks, and if the whites are blown they stay that way because the RAW data has nothing to reference.

Joves wrote: Well from my understanding RAW does keep EC settings since they affect the exposure, or are actually part of the base data when you open them. The other data such as your say picture controls for the Jpegs are not in there, but EC is metering control not applied pre-processing. So getting the exposure right through EC is still needed. If you shoot Manual then you are applying EC when you over or under expose an image, with EC you have tweaked the Meter to do that automatically. You can also do it when shooting manually by say setting a - EC so that when you center the meter reading it actually is under exposing. Using software to heavily or having to use it too heavily, will crush your blacks, and if the whites are blown they stay that way because the RAW data has nothing to reference.

I correct my exposure in post processing

When you adjust exposure in the camera you are increasing or decreasing the amount of actual scene data captured.

When you adjust exposure in processing you are manipulating that data. Processing software has no problem discarding data (darkening), but if you ask it to increase the data (brighten) then it has to make the new data up. It interpolates to fill in the gaps.

Think of your tonal range (white to black). You start with whatever you got with the exposure. In processing brightening is expanding the tonal range, and darkening is contracting it. When you expand the tonal range you get gaps. The software does it's best to fill in these gaps, and in the midtones and highlights it's usually not a problem, but the shadow end already suffers from a lack of exposure data, and when you stretch it image quality suffers: more noise, posterization, etc...

The difference between jpeg and raw is bit depth and double processing. If the camera is set on jpeg it will process the photo. Then if you go do it again it's possible you'll try to reverse things the in-camera software did. Or you may need data the in-camera software discarded. I think it's better to just do the processing once. Either in the camera or on a computer. Personally I think Lightroom/.Adobe Camera Raw kicks the Canon in-camera processing software's butt.

More bit depth means the camera's potential tonal range has more steps. Jpegs and older raw is 8 bit. 8 bit has almost twice as many potential steps in the tonal range than humans need to see a smooth gradient. So with 8 bit there is plenty of tonal range to fiddle with in a decent exposure. An underexposed photo has less tonal steps. At some point, usually high ISO and low light, you may end up with a tonal range close to or below the limit, and that may mean decreased technical image quality. Many current cameras are higher than 8 bit in raw, giving them more room to wiggle, but somewhere they have their limit too.

Under expose in camera and brighten in processing: Generally decreases image quality, although at lower ISOs and when processing raw, it is amazing what you can get away with. At higher ISOs brightening the image much in processing will probably result in more noise, and possibly posterization in the shadows.

Overexpose in camera and darken in processing: Generally increases image quality by reducing noise. This assumes you haven't gone too far and blown the highlights. Today's cameras are so clean looking to start with that this improvement won't be noticeable in most of the normal ISO range.

Make test prints and see with your own eyes. The rules aren't exactly the same for everybody. You have to figure out what techniques suit your style and goals.

Henry Peach wrote: When you adjust exposure in the camera you are increasing or decreasing the amount of actual scene data captured.

When you adjust exposure in processing you are manipulating that data. Processing software has no problem discarding data (darkening), but if you ask it to increase the data (brighten) then it has to make the new data up. It interpolates to fill in the gaps.

Think of your tonal range (white to black). You start with whatever you got with the exposure. In processing brightening is expanding the tonal range, and darkening is contracting it. When you expand the tonal range you get gaps. The software does it's best to fill in these gaps, and in the midtones and highlights it's usually not a problem, but the shadow end already suffers from a lack of exposure data, and when you stretch it image quality suffers: more noise, posterization, etc...

The difference between jpeg and raw is bit depth and double processing. If the camera is set on jpeg it will process the photo. Then if you go do it again it's possible you'll try to reverse things the in-camera software did. Or you may need data the in-camera software discarded. I think it's better to just do the processing once. Either in the camera or on a computer. Personally I think Lightroom/.Adobe Camera Raw kicks the Canon in-camera processing software's butt.

More bit depth means the camera's potential tonal range has more steps. Jpegs and older raw is 8 bit. 8 bit has almost twice as many potential steps in the tonal range than humans need to see a smooth gradient. So with 8 bit there is plenty of tonal range to fiddle with in a decent exposure. An underexposed photo has less tonal steps. At some point, usually high ISO and low light, you may end up with a tonal range close to or below the limit, and that may mean decreased technical image quality. Many current cameras are higher than 8 bit in raw, giving them more room to wiggle, but somewhere they have their limit too.

Under expose in camera and brighten in processing: Generally decreases image quality, although at lower ISOs and when processing raw, it is amazing what you can get away with. At higher ISOs brightening the image much in processing will probably result in more noise, and possibly posterization in the shadows.

Overexpose in camera and darken in processing: Generally increases image quality by reducing noise. This assumes you haven't gone too far and blown the highlights. Today's cameras are so clean looking to start with that this improvement won't be noticeable in most of the normal ISO range.

Make test prints and see with your own eyes. The rules aren't exactly the same for everybody. You have to figure out what techniques suit your style and goals.

WOW

Mostly in Photoshop for me

These post are good information

Henry Peach wrote: When you adjust exposure in the camera you are increasing or decreasing the amount of actual scene data captured.

When you adjust exposure in processing you are manipulating that data. Processing software has no problem discarding data (darkening), but if you ask it to increase the data (brighten) then it has to make the new data up. It interpolates to fill in the gaps.

Think of your tonal range (white to black). You start with whatever you got with the exposure. In processing brightening is expanding the tonal range, and darkening is contracting it. When you expand the tonal range you get gaps. The software does it's best to fill in these gaps, and in the midtones and highlights it's usually not a problem, but the shadow end already suffers from a lack of exposure data, and when you stretch it image quality suffers: more noise, posterization, etc...

The difference between jpeg and raw is bit depth and double processing. If the camera is set on jpeg it will process the photo. Then if you go do it again it's possible you'll try to reverse things the in-camera software did. Or you may need data the in-camera software discarded. I think it's better to just do the processing once. Either in the camera or on a computer. Personally I think Lightroom/.Adobe Camera Raw kicks the Canon in-camera processing software's butt.

More bit depth means the camera's potential tonal range has more steps. Jpegs and older raw is 8 bit. 8 bit has almost twice as many potential steps in the tonal range than humans need to see a smooth gradient. So with 8 bit there is plenty of tonal range to fiddle with in a decent exposure. An underexposed photo has less tonal steps. At some point, usually high ISO and low light, you may end up with a tonal range close to or below the limit, and that may mean decreased technical image quality. Many current cameras are higher than 8 bit in raw, giving them more room to wiggle, but somewhere they have their limit too.

Under expose in camera and brighten in processing: Generally decreases image quality, although at lower ISOs and when processing raw, it is amazing what you can get away with. At higher ISOs brightening the image much in processing will probably result in more noise, and possibly posterization in the shadows.

Overexpose in camera and darken in processing: Generally increases image quality by reducing noise. This assumes you haven't gone too far and blown the highlights. Today's cameras are so clean looking to start with that this improvement won't be noticeable in most of the normal ISO range.

Make test prints and see with your own eyes. The rules aren't exactly the same for everybody. You have to figure out what techniques suit your style and goals.

Pretty much sums it up!