Go Back   RetouchPRO > Tools > Hardware
Register Blogs FAQ Site Nav Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Hardware Computers, displays, tablets, scanners, cameras, printers, etc.

Are on-camera histograms trustworthy?

Thread Tools
Old 09-04-2008, 10:12 AM
willdoak's Avatar
willdoak willdoak is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Downingtown, PA
Posts: 71
Question Are on-camera histograms trustworthy?

According to Deke McClelland (Photoshop CS2 Mastering Camera Raw, "Shooting Considerations" if you subscribe to, on-camera histograms can't be trusted when you're shooting raw, because they "measure the results of JPEG-type presets [that would be] applied to the raw image, not the raw data itself."

So when shooting raw files, you might not be clipping highlights even though the on-camera histogram indicates you are. He notes that some cameras are more accurate with their histograms than others.

I've attached his example of an in-camera histogram he superimposed over a well-exposed raw file, showing how far off the in-camera histogram can be.

Any thoughts on this subject? Anyone done any empirical testing of their cameras' histograms?

I'm using a Nikon D80, FWIW. Maybe I'll give it a shot (so to speak).


Attached Images
File Type: jpg camogram.jpg (33.4 KB, 19 views)
Reply With Quote top
Old 09-04-2008, 12:01 PM
TommyO's Avatar
TommyO TommyO is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: NC, USA
Posts: 1,211
Re: Are on-camera histograms trustworthy?

This would be consistent with other authorities on the subject, as well as common sense. With the limited processing & RAM capabilities of the camera, one would expect only the higher end camera processors to handle a raw histogram properly. Most vendors also have to spend more money to work with third parties to develop the algorithms, whereas they have already made the investment for JPEG's.
Reply With Quote top
Old 09-04-2008, 01:20 PM
dmrdm dmrdm is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 97
Re: Are on-camera histograms trustworthy?

I'm no expert at all, but I've read & heard the same thing. I run the D-80 myself...and don't pay attention to the histogram because of what I read about that and shooting RAW. I have the blinkies turned on. Guess I've shot with the D80 long enough now to know when it clips, which it does alot.

My husband has the Nikon D300 and it's senors are so much better than the D-80. Believe it has what is called a scene recognition system. So shooting the same say landscape shots with the 2 cameras, his RAWs come out of the camera a lot better than mine. (wouldn't be sad at all if I dropped my D-80 someday and had to get the D300)
Reply With Quote top
Old 09-04-2008, 07:13 PM
Craig Walters's Avatar
Craig Walters Craig Walters is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: somewhere over there
Posts: 8,786
Blog Entries: 4
Re: Are on-camera histograms trustworthy?

basically, RAW is exactly that, raw. it's supposed to be data only, no header information, at least in its most pure form. it's just straight out of the sensors data. there is no format, no rhyme, no reason, just raw data. therefore, you'd have to build a headered image within the camera from the raw and do your histogram on that. and that's what a jpeg/raw combo does. so, there is no way to do a true histogram on just raw. you have to convert it to something first.

so, depending on how your camera builds the jpg or whatever it's using, the histogram is based on that and will only be as good as 1. the sensor capture, 2, the raw storage, 3, how the jpeg is built- how well it's done, and 4, how good the histrogram algorithm is.

the simple answer is, you cant build a histogram directly on the raw because the raw isnt interpreted yet. it has no meaning. it's just 0's and 1's. you have to give a significance to the 0's and 1's by making it a structured file type first.

hypothetically, if you were doing this all in-house, you could build a histogram straight from the raw. it would mean having software embedded in the camera that interpretted the 0's and 1's straight to the histogram, but since most cameras that do raw are also capable of doing jpeg, it's like tommy says, why build a second histogram when you already have the jpeg one?

and the other reason i can see is, why worry about a raw histogram when you have instant visual replay through the lcd and the capability of bracketing shots by ev (exposure value).
Reply With Quote top

  RetouchPRO > Tools > Hardware

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nikon Camera Control Pro 2.0 (reviews wanted) Doug Nelson Hardware 8 05-03-2009 09:48 PM
Camera Raw Plug-in for PE3 & Mac os 10.3? freyedso Photoshop Elements Help 3 08-21-2008 10:05 PM
New Camera Owner nebgranny Photography 21 06-20-2008 01:42 AM
Need help deciding camera moo Hardware 12 06-17-2008 11:42 PM
straight into the camera. namphoto Photo Retouching 8 03-27-2008 11:17 AM

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:43 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright © 2016 Doug Nelson. All Rights Reserved