1/3 stop increments in exposure bracketing

[rfkiii]

All I seem to have access to are 1/2 stop increments. I do not use HDR but I do use bracketing for exposure insurance and 1/3 stops can make or break getting the perfect exposure - for me. If I have missed something, please let me know, otherwise...

My understanding of programming is nil and the following question may project my ignorance like a speeding bullet, but since this program is open source, I am wondering, assuming the answer to the above question is negative, if anyone has added 1/3 stops to their HDR bracketing facility? If so, can I purchase a version from you?

[rfkiii]

Wow, not one reply. I don't expect users to respond but the Developer or the Admin ignoring the question? You linked to this forum as Support and both the Admin and Developer has answered other questions since my post so I know you weren't away for the weekend.

Okay then, let me rephrase. Are there any plans to add 1/3 stop increments to the exposure bracketing feature soon?

[a1ex]

No, there are no plans for adding 1/3 stop increments.

You may want to request a refund of all the money you paid for accessing this support forum if you are not satisfied

[hd1roam]

All I seem to have access to are 1/2 stop increments. I do not use HDR but I do use bracketing for exposure insurance and 1/3 stops can make or break getting the perfect exposure - for me.

If you shoot in RAW adjusting for exposure in post should be no problem for the difference between 1/2 and 1/3 stops.

[rfkiii]

No, there are no plans for adding 1/3 stop increments.

I'm curious as to why. If nothing else, you should seek the help of a professional tech writer to produce your help manuals possibly finding one who will donate his time. That simple specification could have saved you and I the time it took to write these exchanges.

You may want to request a refund of all the money you paid for accessing this support forum if you are not satisfied

Below, you'll find the receipt to my donation. It wasn't much, but I had intended to donate regularly as features that helped me were added. If you want to refund it, be my guest.

Edited by nanomad: Never, I repeat, never, upload such information in public as it contains personal data
If you want to get a refound PM bart or a1ex the details....

[ilguercio]

LOL.

[a1ex]

This simple thing is actually hard to do, as 1/3-stops are approximated by either 3/8 or 2/8. On new cameras, if this approximation is not exactly as Canon's, the camera would reject these shutter speeds.

So, rather than introducing complications to implement something of very limited use IMO, I prefer to keep it simple and robust.

Also, am I required to answer every single feature request within 24 hours?!

[nanomad]

Oh, and by the way, the project is run by free people in their free time so we are not actually entitled to answer to anybody. If A1ex does not want  to spend the effort on this (and I can see why, as he's working on the MKIII) he is free to do so.

[rfkiii]

If you shoot in RAW adjusting for exposure in post should be no problem for the difference between 1/2 and 1/3 stops.

'Thanks for the reply. I do shoot RAW. Of course, I'll have to see how this goes but the idea is to get as close to the correct exposure as possible without adjustments. Also saves time in the field avoiding the need to chimp.

[rfkiii]

This simple thing is actually hard to do, as 1/3-stops are approximated by either 3/8 or 2/8. On new cameras, if this approximation is not exactly as Canon's, the camera would reject these shutter speeds.

So, rather than introducing complications to implement something of very limited use IMO, I prefer to keep it simple and robust.

Also, am I required to answer every single feature request within 24 hours?!

Per my original post, I am offering to pay for the programming for a personal version - the going rate for such programming (subject to my ability to pay), not a $10 donation or some such small amount. That's got to be cheaper than buying a 5D3. 

[Malcolm Debono]

How is adjusting the exposure slider in Lightroom (or whichever program you use) easier than selecting the best of 3 photos? 1/2 EV would be more than adequate for the scenario you described, and personally for just that increment, I still wouldn't capture bracketed shots as a single RAW file captures much more dynamic range.

[hd1roam]

How is adjusting the exposure slider in Lightroom (or whichever program you use) easier than selecting the best of 3 photos? 1/2 EV would be more than adequate for the scenario you described, and personally for just that increment, I still wouldn't capture bracketed shots as a single RAW file captures much more dynamic range.

Malcom, are you asking the question or setting the stage for discussion by posing the question? Seems confusing to me.
I'm guessing the later because of your defense of 1/2 stops. In either case I would challenge whether 'easier' is the goal.
Quicker or better might be more like it, but again either way I'm with you, one RAW file will support way more than 1/3 stop.
Anyway, why limit one self to picking a photo out of 3 or more with 1/3 diffs, when you can adjust in much smaller increments anyway.
We will still take the time to adjust in a controlled environment, like a calibrated monitor and consistently lit room.

'Thanks for the reply. I do shoot RAW. Of course, I'll have to see how this goes but the idea is to get as close to the correct exposure as possible without adjustments. Also saves time in the field avoiding the need to chimp.

I can't imagine having an image come so close to correct I won't adjust somehow anyway. That is the beauty and advantage of RAW.
If you were just shooting JPG then I'd want to be much closer and have concern. Also, not seeing any time saved in the field compared to what you still might need to do later.

What is chimp?

So rfk...
Your posts read as if you shoot brackets all the time in hopes of snagging the great shot.
Obviously you are entitled to your own methodology but I have to disagree here and would not want to leverage the method because...

• -This will indisputably will tax your shutter count needlessly.
• -Too many factors beyond 1/3 stop can change a captured scene.
• -This certainly adds more time to download and review because of the frame count.
• -Drive space is cheap but now you have to spend time deleting too. Unless you like to fill up a drive with 24mb+- files for fun.
• -Are you using TTL metering to get close?
• -It only takes seconds to tweak exposure in something like Lightroom at any increment you want up to +-4 full stops. (I would now suggest if you missed by more than 2 full stops or less some practice is needed.)
• -In post you have a controlled environment (or should) to view our results. I don't trust the little screen on the back of the camera any further than to see if I missed badly for some reason. Certainly not for a final shot. How could you in daylight and ever changing conditions if outside.

All in all, I'd be more concerned about getting "The shot" because of more drastic scene changes not 1/3 exposures. And if I did leverage this practice I'd be trying to capture at full stop increments because I do trust the software and file type to adequately cover for me and not waste time in the field.  Practice and experience will get you there with more confidence too.
JMHO, good luck with that.

[rfkiii]

Some photographers believe that getting the correct exposure (or as close as posiible) straight out of the camera is preferable to making the adjustment in software even RAW. I count myself as one of those photographers. That's why there are 1/3 increments and an EC facility in the first place.

I find it laughable that you would say I need practice and experience if I have to explain the above to you.

Since the folks I really wanted to hear from are not responding, I suppose I will bid farewell to my thread. I appreciate everyone's efforts at help even the guy trying to insult me.

Chimping is reviewing the image after the shot presumably to make sure the shot values did not result in clipping or other undesirable consequences.

[ilguercio]

Some photographers believe that getting the correct exposure (or as close as posiible) straight out of the camera is preferable to making the adjustment in software even RAW. I count myself as one of those photographers. That's why there are 1/3 increments and an EC facility in the first place.

I find it laughable that you would say I need practice and experience if I have to explain the above to you.

Since the folks I really wanted to hear from are not responding, I suppose I will bid farewell to my thread. I appreciate everyone's efforts at help even the guy trying to insult me.

Chimping is reviewing the image after the shot presumably to make sure the shot values did not result in clipping or other undesirable consequences.

Changing your habits should not make you a worse photographer then. Why would you do a bracketing if the best exposure is made in camera in the first place?

[Francis]

Changing your habits should not make you a worse photographer then. Why would you do a bracketing if the best exposure is made in camera in the first place?

He is doing the bracketing because he believes it helps him nail the exposure and for him the best exposure is the one made that needs no post compensation. The real answer came from Alex who said that there is no such thing as 1/3 EV adjustments for these Canon cameras and it is all approximations equal to either +- 3/8 or 1/4 EV. Simple answer for a simple request. There is no further need to question or invalidate the OPs methodology.