Under-exposure critiques

[RancerDS]

While viewing a lot of photos where the author is looking for C&C, sometimes run across the odd comment about something being under-exposed.

Either my monitor is much brighter than everyone elses or I have a really poor eye on seeing where the under-exposed areas exist. In some night shots, it is definitely plain enough.

Maybe we should have a rating scale of how badly exposed a photograph is in their opinion for an average consensus? Scale of 1 to 10 maybe? Here is an example I know is poorly exposed for everyone to beat up on the aforementioned scale of reference.

 

[Tulsa]

Can we get a better example to work with?

 

[burnws6]

I say 5 is a perfect balance.

1-4 (underexposed) 6-10 (overexposed/blown highlights)

You're ****ty picture is a 3.685

 

[RancerDS]

Can we get a better example to work with?

<chuckles at the post>

I was thinking that 10 could be for properly exposed and 1 being the worst end of the spectrum, totally black except for a rough image of the subject. Am sure anyone could come up with a good example or set of them for this purpose.

 

[skieur]

Exposure is rather hard to critique on a forum because of the variables involved. Many LCD monitors tend to come out of the box adjusted for maximum brightness and high contrast. Cathode ray tube monitors tend to be closer to a correct adjustment. The result may be that someone with a CRT will see a photo as darker than perhaps one or more posters with LCD monitors that have not be properly adjusted.

Colour space is also a factor. SRGB is the colour space used on the net and in forums. If you shoot with the srgb space option chosen in your camera menu then the posted image will probably be closer to the original, if your monitor is properly calibrated/adjusted. If you shoot in AdobeRGB,
then you will get more colours and better gradations but when it is converted to srgb automatically for the forum, then the number of colours is reduced resulting in detail disappearing and greater contrast which may show up as very dark shadows. The AdobeRGB user may not notice any difference on his/her own monitor, but everyone else may see it underexpsoed.

The last factor is experience in art or viewing photos. Some people can spot even minor colour changes caused by under or over exposure. Other photographers may be incorrectly commenting on a section of the picture when they say that it is under-exposed, rather than on the whole photo.
Still others have done so much adjustment of levels and brightness in Photoshop that they can spot underexposure immediately too.

skieur