I'm amazed at how many photographers believe a histogram should look like a bell curve.
I thought I would post some anti-bell curve histograms to illustrate that's not always the case.
This is no bell curve histogram.
I'm amazed at how many photographers believe a histogram should look like a bell curve.
I thought I would post some anti-bell curve histograms to illustrate that's not always the case.
Reverse Bell Curve
Majority of the image is black.
Bell curve shifted to the right.
Pretty close to a bell curve, the majority of the image is middle tone.
This image is by Blake Shadle - used with permission.
Good examples James. In all of them you have some pixels in the right hand box, which is ideal.
James, it is a shame that we are conditioned to think that a random distribution of luminance in pixels (the bell curve) represents a "good" histogram. As you have shown, there is no "ideal" histogram. The chart is merely a representation of the distribution of pixels versus luminance in an image. The probability density function (bell curve) has no relationship to the distribution of pixel luminance in a given image. I really don't know where that notion came from... The histogram is informational, nothing more.
"It is an illusion that photos are made with the camera... they are made with the eye, heart, and head." - Henri Cartier Bresson
Please visit me on the web at http://kerryperkinsphotography.com
In all the examples posted the data is spread among all 5 stops, so there is a theme here. That is the take away IMO and a key component of strong exposure, thanks Captain.
Posting Permissions
