Auto exposure indicator zero...does this mean it is technically correct?

[rward78]

Nikon D90
Focal length: 82mm
Exposure: .008s (1/125)
Aperture: f/4
ISO 200
no flash

My question is going to tell you just how new I am....When looking at my settings (shooting in manual is a big step for me) I make sure that my autoexposure indicator is equal to zero. I did this in the embedded pictures ( I think) ....does this always indicate a technically correct photograph? Also, if that is the case why come out of auto? This picture is simply me trying to learn...thanks for any feedback!

[zona5101]

the camera may say the exposure is correct but it can't think for you and understand what the subject is or how it is striking your subject. How it "sees" the light and what kind of emphasis it places on the light is controlled by your choice of metering mode...and even then it is still thinking everything in the universe has the same reflectance as an 18% gray card. That is why cameras have =/- exposure compensation or, alternatively, a manual mode.

[jdepould]

Moved to technique forum.

The simple answer is yes, a zeroed out meter equals a nominal exposure (make sure you haven't done any EV compensation though).

That nominal exposure may or may not be correct creatively (or even from a basic technical point of view, if the meter's been fooled). Different metering modes will also give you different exposures, especially in high-contrast scenes. Spot metering could give you a "zero" exposure many stops different than the matrix meter's "zero." If you're in a strong backlight situation, the spot meter is probably going to be the correct choice (assuming you're pointing the camera at the part of the scene you want).

Nikon's matrix meter is extremely good, and I rarely use center-weighted or spot. However, I also shoot raw and use the histogram whenever possible.

You can also meter for the light falling on the scene, rather than the light reflected off the object you're photographic. A handheld light meter will give you the most accurate reading, but pointing the camera's spot meter at a clear blue sky or nice green grass should give you a pretty solid baseline exposure to work from.

[wulf]

I'm sure it is correct in that it has a good balance of light and dark. However, to my eye it looks underexposed. Correct exposure is a matter of judgement rather than just number crunching.

Wulf

[rward78]

Thanks for all the information. I took several random pictures of my child and some ashes from the burn pile and always seemed to like the ones that were a little under exposed more for the richer colors I got (at least to my untrained eye.) Thanks also for moving me to the right forum! Have a great day :-)

[rward78]

Going to try some of your suggestions today!

[SusanH1970]

Originally Posted by wulf

I'm sure it is correct in that it has a good balance of light and dark. However, to my eye it looks underexposed. Correct exposure is a matter of judgement rather than just number crunching.

Wulf

+1. You took the words out of my mouth, Wulf.