Comments on: Histograms: Huh?

By: photographyVoter.com

photographyVoter.com — Sun, 03 Jun 2007 19:58:06 +0000

Histograms: Huh?…

Today I will unclothe the common histogram and show you not only how to read it, but also how you can use it to strengthen your work. Lots of illustrations!…

By: James Silverton

James Silverton — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 18:18:35 +0000

I think it’s going to make a very interesting study!

Thanks!

By: Aaron

Aaron — Tue, 05 Jun 2007 02:24:34 +0000

You’re welcome, James. Thanks for taking the time to read it.

By: Большой 40-ваттный Светляк… » Гистограммы!? Что за...

Большой 40-ваттный Светляк… » Гистограммы!? Что за... — Tue, 05 Jun 2007 10:52:45 +0000

[…] его замечательную статью. Оригинал вы можете прочесть здесь, однако я думаю, что многим будет приятнее получить […]

By: Susheel

Susheel — Wed, 06 Jun 2007 07:18:18 +0000

Nice examples. This would really have helped me out when I was learning… I had to learn it the hard way…

Susheel

By: Photoshop Insider » Some Quick Monday News

Photoshop Insider » Some Quick Monday News — Mon, 16 Jul 2007 04:17:18 +0000

[…] in-depth article called “Histograms, Huh?” from Aaron over at Single Serving Photo. Click here to go […]

By: Gregg Lowrimore Photography » Blog Archive » Histograms

Gregg Lowrimore Photography » Blog Archive » Histograms — Mon, 16 Jul 2007 05:53:11 +0000

[…] called “Histograms, Huh?” from Aaron over at Single Serving Photo. To read the article, click here. Powered by […]

By: gabriel ortega

gabriel ortega — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 16:26:30 +0000

I’ve read, and I forget where, that the histogram’s displayed on most digital cameras are the histograms of the jpeg previews used for the LCD… therefore, they don’t actually display the REAL histogram data which is obviously better. I’ll try to figure out where I read this and get back to you…

By: Aaron

Aaron — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 16:32:21 +0000

@Gabriel

It seems to me that the RAW data may have to be massaged somewhat in order for the histogram to make sense to the user (why or how I am not certain of), but it would defeat the purpose of the histogram to display the data after processing by the JPEG system because that system (in Canon cameras, the DIGIC processor) often changes the tone curve as part of its enhancement process, so I’m confident that it isn’t true for Canon cameras at least.

I could do an experiment, taking the same photo in JPEG and in RAW mode and see if the histogram appears different on the screen. Perhaps I will.

By: Single-Serving Photo » Blog Archive » Thanks, Scott Kelby

Single-Serving Photo » Blog Archive » Thanks, Scott Kelby — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:31:16 +0000

[…] Association of Photoshop Professionals (NAPP), took notice of my visual article on histograms (Histograms, Huh?) and linked it in a Monday links roundup on his blog, Photoshop […]

By: Гистограммы!? Что за… | Блог Большого 40вт Светляка

Гистограммы!? Что за… | Блог Большого 40вт Светляка — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 14:46:21 +0000

By: The Curious Lens Blog » Blog Archive » Death Valley Workshop, April 2008

Sat, 15 Sep 2007 00:16:09 +0000

[…] Histograms, Huh? […]

By: gabriel ortega

gabriel ortega — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 00:57:17 +0000

I totally forgot to get back at you regarding the LCD histogram representation… I finally remembered that it’s from Real World Camera Raw with Photoshop; also noted here:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=767645&postcount=19

By: Aaron

Aaron — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 01:13:07 +0000

@Gabriel

Thanks for the link. I sincerely believe that there is no substitute for experience. Before digital was so ubiquitous, the light meter was the best information you could get about the exposure characteristics of a scene and I think we can agree that some of the most timeless and iconic photographs in history were made with a combination of the light meter and experience. I also believe that the histogram is incalculably useful to those who know how to read it, even if it’s an approximation based on compressed data.

When it comes to information, the more the merrier!