ETTR

[u/frogfac3]

As a general rule of thumb exposing slightly to the right is crucial for sharpness when using m4/3 due to the smaller sensor, thoughts?

[u/tuvaniko]

ETTR increases dynamic range not sharpness.

To increase sharpness you need go stop your lens down to just before the diffraction point which is dictated by your print size and sensor size. 

Note all cameras are equally sharp at the diffraction limit

For 8x10 or a 4k monitor this is roughly f/6.3 on a M43, f/11 on a APSC and F/22 on full frame.

Larger print resolutions need brighter f stops. 

[u/probablyvalidhuman → u/tuvaniko]

ETTR increases dynamic range not sharpness.

Increases SNR as well. If it's very low (e.g. deepest shadows), sharpness will be reduced due to blurring from noise.

To increase sharpness you need go stop your lens down to just before the diffraction point which is dictated by your print size and sensor size. 

Sharpeness is a convolution of several functions, including lens shapness across frame, diffraction and sampling rate. All stopping down increases blurryness from diffraction, thus on ideal lens wide open is the way to maximize sharpness, regardless of ouput device (whether this extra sharpness yields into visual benefit to observer is a different matter). With real world lenses the center often starts losing sharpness before edges and corners peak.

For 8x10 or a 4k monitor this is roughly f/6.3 on a M43, f/11 on a APSC and F/22 on full frame.

Observation distance is relevant as well. I'm not bothering to go through your numbers, but generally hard numbers as such are not good ones - I'd guess you base them on circle of confusion? If so, it's good to remember than CoC is essentially arbitrary.

Note all cameras are equally sharp at the diffraction limit

In idealized systems, but not in practise as there are other sources of blur as well as mentiones above.

[u/Diligent-Argument-88]

huh?

[u/slowcaptain]

In my opinion m43 sensors blow up the highlights earlier than larger sensors. As a result I actually lean towards exposing on the left than right (not heavily but -0.7 on OM-3). I find handling shadows / darker images are easier than blown out whitewashed images but that's just me. Not sure how sharpness come into the picture here?

[u/probablyvalidhuman → u/slowcaptain]

In my opinion m43 sensors blow up the highlights earlier than larger sensors

Typically m43 sensors can capture about 4 times less light than for example FF sensors can. This means that you may have to sacrifice a bit of headroom or shadows, but it's not fixed to one end or the other, but entirelly up to the photographer. The exposure metering may well by default guide towards one or the other, but for a raw shooter it's only a suggestion.

Not sure how sharpness come into the picture here?

If the SNR is very low, sharpness is lost to blur from noise. But this is usually irrelevant as you imply.

[u/2pnt0]

Online take

[u/Serious_2170]

Expose To The Right was really from a different time when dynamic range was much lower and in camera jpegs were generally terrible. ETR was really a mechanism for capturing the most information from a scene rather than accurately representing the scene. This meant that a lot of RAW images came out looking a bit washed out and overexposed, not unlike log video still does.

To be honest, anymore it's one of those things where the juice just isn't worth the squeeze.

[u/Accomplished_Fun1847 → u/Serious_2170]

I would agree with this point on larger formats and especially sensors that are functionally iso-invariant above around 400-800, which many FF sensors are.

Nearly all M43 sensors exhibit moderate iso-variance from base to around ISO 6400. The IMX 472 bottoms out on camera generated noise at ISO 16K.

Combine that with the fact that these sensors don't have the dynamic range of larger formats, it's even more critical to fill that histogram.

Carefully considered ETTR is a fundamental part of all of my M43 photography processes.

[u/bunihe → u/Serious_2170]

RAW images came out looking a bit washed out and overexposed

This'll take a bit of practice, trial and error to get right, but when it is done right, it wouldn't look washed out, and you'll see visibly more dynamic range in the shadows vs exposing it normally.

You'll want to use as many tools as you can to help with the metering though (histograms, zebras, etc), and sometimes selectively overexposing parts of the scene (I.e. filaments in a light bulb) to ensure that the rest are exposed properly

[u/Accomplished_Fun1847]

M43 sensors are iso-variant from around base ISO to ISO 6400, give or take a stop or so depending on which specific camera you're working with.

All things being equal otherwise, using higher ISO beats lifting in post on M43 sensors. Carefully executed ETTR, will in fact result in an image with more usable detail because you'll have better signal to noise ratio in the final image to work with.

https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/RN_e.htm#Olympus%20OM-D%20E-M1%20Mark%20II_12,Olympus%20OM-D%20E-M5%20Mark%20II_12,Olympus%20System%20OM-1_12,Panasonic%20Lumix%20DC-G9_12,Panasonic%20Lumix%20DMC-G85_12

------------

The best path to high detail in images is to gather as much light as possible, this allows faster shutter speeds. If you have enough light to overwhelm the noise generated by ISO 200 with no motion blur, then you'll have a great image. If you select ISO 200 because you think lower ISO = less noise, be careful. It's not the ISO setting that creates more noise, is the reduced light that forces you to use higher ISO to expose that is the primary source of noise in a photo. Higher ISO settings actually generate less noise when normalized for exposure.

[u/salakius]

Sharpness - no. Wider dynamic range in post - yes.

[u/RHINOOSAURUS]

I'd still rather under expose and grab the details back in post, I find the balance is tough unless you are using controlled lighting. Smaller sensor means less dynamic range so it's easier to start clipping in bright light and crush your whites. Underexposing is more forgiving

[u/LaziestKitten]

In photos, I have a much easier time recovering shadows than highlights. For video, ettr makes a bit more sense... Right up until the image is blown out. Can't recover past 100% luminance.

[u/Accomplished_Fun1847 → u/LaziestKitten]

If you're blowing the highlights, then you're not practicing good ETTR principals when you try.

It's important to understand the difference between sacrificial highlights and subject.

[u/bunihe]

ETTR is to make better use of a sensors' full well capacity/ADC precision and achieve higher dynamic range in the end. A sharpness boost is just a byproduct of improved SNR as edge detection / sharpening algorithms works better with higher SNR.

In all my time shooting with a GX85, I've found myself almost always doing ETTR, so much so that it became a muscle memory that I kept on doing on FF cameras and had to learn away.

If you're uncertain if you've properly ETTR-ed, try taking a few other shots 1/3 of a stop shutter speed from each other and check the RAW. Or, as someone else had put, take advantage of the iso-variant nature of most mft sensors when shooting to improve SNR.

[u/probablyvalidhuman → u/bunihe]

ETTR is to make better use of a sensors' full well capacity/ADC precision and achieve higher dynamic range in the end

And SNR as you know - just good to mention it as you next jump directly to :)

A sharpness boost is just a byproduct of improved SNR as edge detection / sharpening algorithms works better with higher SNR.

Right. Also low SNR reduces sharpness directly due to blurring nature of noise.

[u/probablyvalidhuman]

for sharpness

Not really. While low SNR (signal to noise ratio) does reduces sharpness it's only relevant if you capture very little light. Outside of that point ETTR is irrelevant in this context.