Add new comment

l_d_allan's picture

Thanks for the clarification.
I think I'd use the word "less difficult" or "easier" than easy ... and it is still clearly a "quick estimate' even with RD. With the default linear vertical scale for histograms, the left and right sides generally are pretty close to the horizonal line. The non-linear choices do help with that ... a LOT.
BTW: Is the option to use a non-linear scale for the vertical axis of the histogram availabe in FRV? Did I miss that? If not, could that be a "Feature Request"?
tl;dr? sorry
With MagicLantern's auto-ETTR ... which I am guessing you are aware of if not familar with ... you can use "fine tuning" of how much, if any, blown pixels to ignore. For a low contrast scene, you'd use zero %. At the other extreme with the sun in the middle of the frame on a clear day, you might use 10% or even higher. A typical value might be from 0.5% to 1%, which often allows much more exposure than 0% ... perhaps several EV, which seems counter-intuitive.
My point is that RD and/or FRV could perhaps allow conceptually similar "fine tuning" of what the "significant pixel count" default would be. 0.5% to 1% might again be default values, unless the 'tog KNEW there were no blown highlights and 0% was appropriate. Also, if the capture was obviously less than ETTR because there were 0 blown pixels, then the OvExp fine tuning could be 0%. That probably applies a LOT with JPEG based blinkies, histogram, Preview, Review, Zebras, etc..
I don't think in terms of refining UnExp as OvExp seems Much More Important. That could be more complicated to get "just so", if that was important.