I've found that my camera (Sony A99) is very forgiving in terms of overexposure when shooting in RAW. By that I mean, I can overexposure by a stop or so and when I get home for the post processing I can underexpose it back and get all the details back.

Of course this wouldn't work in jpeg. There's no data beyond the right most area of the histogram. But not the same with RAW, data magically come back into the histogram. Why? Does the camera reserve an area of the histogram from me in case I make mistaken? If so, doesn't this mean some latitude is lost if I were to shoot correctly (perfectly exposed)?

Also, why is this only available for overexposure? But not underexposure? I don't think I'll be able to pull details out of crushed black areas.


4 Answers 4


This is one of the benefits you get from shooting raw.

You can't recover highlight or shadow detail from a JPEG because it has 8 bits of color depth per color component,1 and it's mapped so that the lowest pixel value is interpreted as "black," and the highest is "white." There simply is nothing below black or above white. The creators of JPEG did this because 8 bpc is adequate for humans to perceive a properly-exposed full-color image.2 The human eye has greater dynamic range than JPEG allows, but it can't see that full range all the time.3

Most raw-capable cameras are capable of capturing at least 10 bpc. 12 bpc+ is very common, and 14 bpc+ is possible with the best sensors. The trick is, how to make use of this additional dynamic range? There are several design spaces in which to find a solution:

  • Full range capture and display

    The camera's exposure meter could try to capture as much dynamic range as is physically possible, and it could attempt to display it all on the little screen on the back of the camera. Your raw processing software could likewise attempt to show you all of the dynamic range in the image file on screen. When saving a JPEG, the camera could just map this full dymamic range in the obvious way, effectively discarding the least significant bits from the sensor.

    No one does this.4

    If you take a picture of a backlit bush at sunset, the camera could attempt to capture the black ants in the dark gray shadow under the dense dark green foliage while at the same time capturing sun spot detail in the sun's disc.

    Cameras don't do this because the resulting image would look like striped mud. Human eyes don't have the dynamic range to see the ants and the sun spots at the same time, so human brains don't expect to see such things.5 We don't have display technology good enough to reproduce a physically correct image, either.6

  • Slice from the middle

    Instead, the camera could simply put its notion of "correct" exposure right in the middle of the range, and extract the 8-bit JPEG and the screen preview from the middle of the range. If your camera has a 12-bit sensor, it could effectively give you a ±2 stop exposure adjustment range, since every 1 bpc translates into 1 stop, in photographic terms.

    I don't think that this is an entirely bad way to go, but it wouldn't give the most pleasing imagery. Camera companies that did this wouldn't be selling many cameras.

  • Black point and gamma curve

    A much better plan is to pick a brightness level in the image to call black7 and then choose a gamma curve to remap the raw sensor data into that 8 bpc range.

    With this method, the camera and raw processing software can choose to leave some of the raw data outside the mapped range, so that the raw image file encodes blacker-than-black and brighter-than-white. This is the region you're pulling from when your raw processing software recovers highlight or shadow detail.

There is no universal authority mandating which method to use, and even if there were, there is plenty of variation in existing technology and still plenty more room for further variation. For example, Lossy DNGs use an 8 bpc color space, but the nonlinear way the input image data is mapped to output values, you still have a bit of dynamic range to work with outside the normally visible display range.


  1. 8 bpc is also called "24-bit" by those who prefer to consider all three channels needed for color imaging together.

  2. At any single moment, the human eye has less dynamic range than you get from 8 bpc. The only reason we use even that many bits per channel is that computers like dealing with data in 8-bit chunks, as do digital displays. Any value a 7 bpc or 9 bpc variant of JPEG might have is wiped out by decades of historical inertia pushing us to stick with 8.

  3. If your eyes could use their full dynamic range all the time, you wouldn't have to squint for a while when walking outside from a dimly lit house at noon, or when turning on the bedside light when waking up in the dark.

  4. I have no doubt this has been tried several times in research labs. I'd even be unsurprised to learn that software has been made publicly available that does this. If I wanted to be precisely correct, I'd have to rewrite that sentence to something less punchy like, "No one has been commercially successful producing software or hardware that presents images using this method."

  5. This is part of the reason it's hard to make a good HDR.

  6. And if we did have such technology, you wouldn't be able to look at the sun in the reproduced image, any more than you could while taking the picture.

  7. Or white, if you prefer. It really doesn't matter. You can work the math either way.

  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Even better, the Sony A99 has an Exmor sensor, which is essentially ISOless. That is, pulling or pushing an exposure by a few stops in post has essentially the same effect on noise as changing the ISO in-camera by the same number of stops. \$\endgroup\$ Commented May 19, 2013 at 4:25
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ Updated answer is outstanding! \$\endgroup\$
    – mattdm
    Commented May 21, 2013 at 1:51
  • \$\begingroup\$ Fascinating. If I shoot RAW and then import into Lightroom am I automatically utilizing the full raw data when I make my tweaks with the various sliders, or do I need to get more involved with the advanced options? \$\endgroup\$
    – Drew
    Commented May 21, 2013 at 3:20
  • \$\begingroup\$ Occasionally a camera manufacturer will invent some strange new raw variant that has "features" in it that do not correspond to features in third party raw processing software, forcing you to use the proprietary first-party software to use the new feature. Adobe has added features to Lightroom and ACR to accommodate such misfeatures a few times to my knowledge, and probably done a lot more I haven't noticed. As a rule, you needn't feel left out of anything really important using Lightroom. \$\endgroup\$ Commented May 21, 2013 at 3:46
  • \$\begingroup\$ @AndrewHeath Yes. When I shoot flashless indoors with my Canon I often get white windows in the initial default image and in the camera jpeg version, but then I slide "highlights" down and suddenly I see all the greens in the garden outside and the blue sky. \$\endgroup\$ Commented May 21, 2013 at 19:56

The histogram your camera displays is based on the in-camera jpeg preview generated when you save a RAW file. In the preview, the data is gone and unrecoverable. The information is still there in the RAW file, though.

Most cameras use in the neighborhood of 12 to 14 bits per color channel, but the JPEG standard only allows 8 bits per channel. When you display your RAW file on your computer, the display there is also limited to 8 bits per color channel. The same thing is happening on your computer that happens on the camera's preview screen and in the histogram. By changing the exposure in post processing, you change which eight of the 12-14 bits per color channel are actually displayed on the monitor. By adjusting the tone curves, you can even squeeze more of that dynamic range into only 8 bits.


Dynamic range is the difference between the darkest and brightest portion of an image. JPEGs have to represent each color with 8 bits of information where as raw can use more bits (thus more possible values).

There are two options for how the camera can resolve the difference in bit depth. Either it can represent a smaller variation for each value (smaller steps) or it can represent a wider dynamic range. It could also do some combination in between.

For cameras that have a wide dynamic range for the sensor, the jpeg is going to normally be focused around only a portion of the dynamic range to give smooth gradients with a limited number of values possible. The raw file however will cover the full dynamic range of the sensor and thus is able to store information that would otherwise be out of range for the JPEG (because it exceeds the max 8 bit value.)

That extra headroom in the RAW file allows you to shift the points down into the range that can be expressed by a JPEG that you manually produce later through a RAW utility.


Bottom line? You are asking about using your camera's full allotment of dynamic range, which, in fact, exceeds that suggested by the width of your A99's JPEG-adjusted histogram frame.

Here's a tutorial posted at UglyHedgehog that addresses that precise problem.



Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.