I thought that I was the only one who experienced this. I worked around the problem by setting my exposure compensation for +2/3 stop.

My EOS-10D normally runs from -1/2 to -1 stop exposure compensation, depending on how bright the scene is. I use the histogram function (and i think a lot of consumers could learn to interpret a simple histogram), but I really like the RGB histogram that the EOS-1Ds MarkII sports. I find it tells me a lot more about the exposure characteristics.

That having been said, I often shoot RAW with the 10-D, and use Photoshop Elements 3.0 (which also has the RGB histogram), which allows me to adjust exposure parameters (at the cost of larger file sizes.)

-EdT.

Well, a histogram is not really intuitive. Not one of my friends has any idea as to how to interpret it.

Books and magazines sometimes explain it, but most people's eyes glaze over when they read that.

Someone could probably write the definitive Guide to Histogram Interpretation - simple, easy to follow, with lots of examples (photos and histogram graphs). But even then, only a tiny % of the population would ever see it, or study it.

Consequently, I think the blinking warnings (lost highlight and/or shadow detail) are a better idea for 90% of digicam owners.

Digital SLR's should have both the histogram and the warning blinks.

Dear Peter,

So sell it and buy a real camera!

Alternatively, learn to read a histogram. There was an excellent Shutterbug article on this recently, or you can do it by trial and error.

Obviously this is aimed at lurkers rather than you personally. I know that you can read a histogram, even if you have an inexplicable preference for digicams, but those who can't read them should either learn to do so immediately or revert to film, which will give them better quality anway.

Cheers,

Roger (www.rogerandfrances.com)

Frances: I'd say the EOS 1Ds Mk II is a real camera. I do not want to sell it.

And yes, as you say ... I do know how to read and interpret a histogram. But not many people do - at least those who own compact digicams. (I have taught two friends, who own digital SLR's, how to use the histogram.)

Cheers!

Not sure what the rant is for Peter. This is and has been a well known fact for years. Unless you're simply trying to create controversy to generate interest in the nascent Shutterbug fora.

Considering that many p&s digicam users have migrated from p&s film cameras, why do you expect them to start using tools they never used in the past? Seems a bit silly really. Many (perhaps most) people are going to shoot in JPEG with AWB and take the results they get.

They may end up being somewhat disappointed in the results but it's not because their cameras don't have a histogram function or blinking exposure indicators. It's because of the narrower photographic latitude of the digital sensor (more akin to slide film) and that they're used to using print film which has a wider latitude and having their prints adjusted by the lab that does their processing/printing. If they don't understand that difference and how to work with it, then they're going to get results that aren't generally as pleasing as they did with their film cameras.

In addition, if you were to do even a modicum of research you'd find that there are plenty of good resources available on the web discussing histograms, what they are, what information they contain and how to use them.

OH how soon we forget and take the modern technology for granted. Remember the good old days of Poloroids and bracketing like crazy just to be sure to get just one decent snap?
Auto bracketing is still possible with digital cameras, btw.
Many dslr's also have a highlight/over exposure warning system as well.
And spot meters to measure the SBR.
An acquantance of mine once said: " I'm not a photographer, I shoot digital".
If, everything is left up to PS for correction, then the number of "keepers" goes down. How about using proper PHOTOGRAPHIC technique? Over the years, I have found that it CAN help.

Off the subject but I have wondered for some time if you are related to/descended from Bob Burian of Hartford, CT. My father was a photographer in Hartford in the forties after working for Bachrach and before joining Kodak as a techrep
after the war. I recall him mentioning his friend Bob Burian many times. I could be foggy in my memory and his friend Bob might have been up in Massachusetts where we moved in 1948. ???? My email is daleh@surewest.net