
exposure metering – bride & the bride’s dress
From a technical point of view, photographing a bride in her dress can be a challenge … depending on the lighting. If everything is under your control as the photographer, and you’re lighting the formal portraits with off-camera manual flash, then it is essentially a study of the zone system.
The simplest way for me then to get accurate exposure, is to use the histogram. I place my brightest relevant tone at the edge of the histogram. All the other tones will fall into place. (It is clearly explained in that linked article, and in my book on flash photography techniques.) In using flash like that as your dominant light source, you simply expose correctly for your subject – the bride in her white dress.
Now, when working with ambient light (perhaps with a touch of fill-flash), things are slightly different .. but not really. You still always (or nearly always**), need to expose correctly for the bride’s white dress, making it the brightest tone that you want to capture detail in. For this article, we’re going to look at exposure metering for available light. The same thought-process can be applied to flash or other additional lighting, but just for simplicity of explanation, let’s just stay with available light here.
So, looking at this portrait above of Jill, a gorgeous bride whose wedding I recently photographed …
You will notice that there are darker areas in the frame (towards the bottom), and there are brighter areas to the top … and then of course, a striking looking bride as our subject. In white.
This is where using an automatic metering mode on your camera, such as Aperture Priority (Av) or Program will most often fail you. Your camera – even with Evaluative / Matrix metering – will meter for the entire scene, including your subject. Even though Evaluative / Matrix metering will give weight to different areas of the frame, and try to get to the best compromise exposure it can figure out according to the camera’s built-in metering algorithms … it’s still guessing at what you’re trying to do.
Here’s an example of the camera set to Aperture Priority, and left to its own to calculate the exposure:
The bright areas in the frame fooled the camera’s meter into under-exposing your subject. This is a crucial distinction we need to make – we always (or nearly always**) need to expose correctly for our subject, not the entire frame.
You may have noticed the (**) there – the “nearly always” qualifier. Often enough, there are different considerations than exposing just for your subject. A recent example would be the couple photographed against the ‘neon sky’. So there are exceptions to the general advice to always expose for your subject. That is something we as photographers need to decide as to how we’re going to interpret our subject & scene, by our choice of exposure settings.
Back to the portrait of Jill. With the strong back-lighting, I had to meter for specifically for my subject. NOT the scene. Unless, as just mentioned, I wanted a silhouette effect. Or something similar, such as under-exposing my subject to an extent for a specific mood that you might want to create. It depends. But generally, you expose for your subject. And here, I wanted the shaded side of our bride (and her dress) properly exposed.
The linked article about how I use the histogram to figure out exposure metering, makes use of the idea that the right-hand side of my histogram shows the brightest detail that I can capture. That would be the white dress here. But you should notice, that every part of the dress isn’t at the same tonal level. The area of the dress at the bottom of the frame is darker. There is also rim-lighting where the edges of the dress blow out. So, without additional lighting here to even it all out, there is no way to capture ALL of the dress as the same tonal level. We have to make a decision as to what part of the dress we’d want to capture and place correctly as a bright tone.
This then, would be the top-most part of the dress which has the same kind of light, and same intensity light that falls on her face. Using the histogram method, and using the camera’s built-in meter reading selectively … I point my camera at ONLY the brightest part of my subject.
With my camera in manual metered mode, I can then either,
- zoom in tight (which is what I normally do), and exclude EVERYTHING that isn’t the white dress; or
- use the camera’s spot-meter.
Now in the same way that the camera’s built-in meter was fooled by the bright background, I can’t simply zero my camera’s meter while in manual. I need to keep in mind WHERE / HOW I want to place the white tone. Depending on the camera make and model, I will shift my exposure between 1 and 2 stops in exposure up from where the needle is zero. For the Canon 5D, I found that +1.7 stops (5 clicks on the display / camera controls) will do the trick. For the Nikon D3, it is around +1 and +1.3 stops (3 or 4 clicks up.) This is something you need to figure out for your camera. You HAVE to be familiar with your camera’s controls, and how your camera’s meter works and responds.
Here is the screen-grab of how this RAW file looks in ACR / Lightroom. The red areas are were the RAW editing software is warning me that I could be, or am, losing detail.
Where there is rim-lighting, I will lose detail. But this doesn’t bother me, since this is what makes it rim-lighting – some area around the edge of my subject that is bright enough to lose some detail.
Where the background is over-bright, I will lose detail. Once again, this doesn’t concern me here. I’m not a landscape photographer. I’m a portrait / wedding photographer. My SUBJECT is all-important. Not the background. The background is merely context or something interesting to place my subject against.
Where I’m losing detail in the veil, I will (and did) attempt to pull back a fair amount of detail with the local (exposure) correction brush in ACR / Lightroom.

As you can see here from the histogram in ACR / Lightroom, the histogram is bunching up against the right-hand side. This is because I am losing detail … the image is over-exposed … if you consider the entire frame. But we shouldn’t. We should mostly just consider our subject. So that histogram there is meaningless to me. The histogram that did matter to me, was the histogram I got in my camera at the time that I selectively metered off her dress. THAT histogram needed to dip close to the edge of the histogram display, and not bunch up against the side. (Again, this is explained in the linked article and in my book on flash photography.)

Here is the final image again … I corrected the WB as part of my normal raw work flow, and pulled down the exposure in her veil with a localized correction brush. I did sweeten the image slightly in post-processing the JPG for displaying here. (It isn’t something I would do for 500+ proofs for a wedding. It’s just not logistically feasible. Just selected images.)

Oh, and here are my camera settings.
So with this, I have now answered a question I am often asked … when I do my exposure metering for the bride and her dress, do I meter off the bride’s dress? And the answer is … nearly always**
Yes, do note the qualifier there. Nearly always. But there is a method to it, and consideration of the proper tonal placement of the white dress, and subsequently, the skin tones.
All of this also ties in with a question that Mark Smith sent in. Mark was concerned about the histogram in this image bunching up to the right. Yet the dress looked fine with no blinking highlights showing that there might be loss of detail.
So coupling this with the preceding explanations, I’d say the exposure here is perfect, and we can’t gain anything useful from the overall histogram. I would be guided by the blinking highlights (and perhaps numerical values of colors in Photoshop) of the dress. That would show perfect exposure. And this would imply perfect exposure for the skin tones that are important – the bride and groom’s.
Mark was also concerned that this following image showed 1.5 stops under-exposure, but the dress was blowing out.
Going by the previous explanation again, the meter reading might well show under-exposure … but this isn’t relevant, since the meter reading is for the entire scene. And what we are interested in, is correct exposure metering for our subject – the bride. The dark trees and foliage and black tuxes are influencing your camera’s meter here. What we really should be looking it is correctly exposing for our brightest relevant tone – the bride’s white dress.

Hopefully this article ties a bunch of different concepts and photography techniques together into something that makes sense, and offers us a coherent method. A consistent method of approaching our exposure metering.
More articles about wedding photography …
photography books by Neil vN
newsletter / forum / workshops & seminars
Stay informed of new articles via the monthly newsletter.
Also join us on the Tangents forum for further discussions.
If you need more direct help or instruction on flash photography,
I do present workshops & seminars and also offer individual tutoring sessions.
If you find these articles interesting and of value, then you can help by
using these affiliate links to order equipment & other goodies. Thank you!








great neil as expected every time visiting your tangents article.
just a perfect lesson which covers all (or mostly) items needed.
thanks for your patience to teach us “lighting”.
i like your site very much :-))
grts
olympus
Comment by olympus_fotograph — October 21, 2010 @ 3:45 am
Another excellent article Neil with solid advice on maximising chances of success in challenging lighting situations. I’m and avid follower of your blog but haven’t commented before. Having recently increased the number of weddings I photograph, your help and advice has been invaluable. I’m always recommending your book too, which is a “must have” and a great read cover-to-cover.
Regards
Ed …
Comment by Ed — October 21, 2010 @ 5:09 am
Hi Neil
Thanks for covering one of the most fundamental principles of photograph in an easy to understand way. I think for me I take reassurance and confidence from reading this that every image needn’t have perfect exposure and tonal value to be deemed ‘correct’, and that it is a subjective decision on the part of the photographer, and as such, in this instance it is ok to allow the background and other areas of lesser importance to blow out or go into deep shadow.
Nigel
Comment by Nigel — October 21, 2010 @ 5:43 am
Great blog as usual. Sorry going off topic but can you let us all know at what booth and at what specific date and time you will be at the Photo Plus show NYC ??
Comment by Ron Lemish — October 21, 2010 @ 5:45 am
Comment by Neil vN — October 21, 2010 @ 6:32 am
Thanks Neil. Just to clarify…you’re adding EV via the camera to arrive at the exposure but if you add flash to the mix then Nikon cameras the flash would pump out that +ev value as well. So are you compensating with the flash by using -fev to simply flick a little fill in there?
Comment by Paul — October 21, 2010 @ 7:36 am
Comment by Neil vN — October 21, 2010 @ 8:17 am
While I’m not a wedding photographer, I’ve been puzzling over something quite similar. Photographing football players. While they are often in white uniforms for the session, they could easily be in any color. Yet I want a way of determining the exposure to get consistent even though the uniform color/brightness and skin tone may vary significantly.
Photographing a white player in a blue uniform, an asian player black and a black player in white has my head spinning. I’m not sure what to key off of to get consistent results across many players. Do I start with a gray card and shoot everyone based on it?
Comment by Dan Rode — October 21, 2010 @ 9:00 am
Comment by Neil vN — October 21, 2010 @ 9:58 am
Neil, lately I’ve been relying more on the spot metering mode on my Canon 7D to better isolate metering to the areas of interest on my subjects (e.g. wedding brides), and it’s been working great most of the time. I’m particulary interested in its ability to help make off-camera flash exposures in E-TTL mode more consistent. Of course it all depends on the scene, but do you find spot metering helps make your E-TTL flash exposures more consistent?
Comment by Frank — October 21, 2010 @ 11:01 am
Comment by Neil vN — October 21, 2010 @ 11:30 am
Neil,
Thanks for that breakdown. My question is, did you use fill flash or a reflector on the bride? It appears that you did use some fill, but I did not see where you described the setup. Thanks again for all your sharing.
Comment by Eric Muetterties — October 21, 2010 @ 12:09 pm
Comment by Neil vN — October 21, 2010 @ 12:37 pm
Neil,
This is the clearest and most comprehensive article about exposure metering for the most relevant tone in ambient light you’ve written so far. This content should go into the next edition of your on-camera flash photography book.
While you do talk about the same ideas in the book and in older blog articles, I strongly believe that your writing style has also evolved over time to write clearer and better articles like this one. Excellent article!
Comment by Stephen — October 21, 2010 @ 12:38 pm
Hi Neil,
This is one of the best articles I have ever read on ‘exposure’. Also, this is one of the best articles I have read here. You seem to make these things extremely easy. You are one awesome teacher. Hats off to you.
Naieem
Comment by Naieem Kaiz — October 21, 2010 @ 12:44 pm
As I said before, you are a wizard with 2 hats. No more words.
Comment by Dragos — October 21, 2010 @ 2:43 pm
Comment by Neil vN — October 21, 2010 @ 4:58 pm
Neil, thanks so much for using my raw photos are a example of great explanation of metering.
The histogram was actually a mountain on the way left, very dark image with a few bunching spikes on the right.
As far as blinking highlights go, the first photo which I thought was underexposed did not show any blinkers but the 2nd shot had blinkers all over her dress, its amazing what a difference 1/240 sec makes. I was able to use PS highlight recovery to bring back some of the 2nd image.
A couple things I learned from this wedding, never trust your lcd while shooting because mine showed a “too very dark” image, when I brought it into the full size calibrated monitor, I realized I wasnt as bad as I first thought, I trusted my blinking highlights for her dress and thats what I shot for.
Question, what kind of numbers are you looking for in photoshop for perfect white exposure or what numbers for SKIN TONE?
Thanks for all your help, I’m a daily reader and trusting user of your techniques, I’m humbled to your genorousity in using one of my images for your example.
M
Comment by mark smith — October 21, 2010 @ 6:04 pm
Comment by Neil vN — October 24, 2010 @ 5:00 am
Neil, to answer your question, it depends on the scene/subject. Sometimes when using spot metering and off-cam E-TTL flash, I’ll lock the exposure and recompose, other times I don’t. The main difference I see with spot versus the other metering modes is consistency. Even though I still need to selectively use FEC to adjust the E-TTL exposures when necessary, the amount of FEC required seems to vary less from shot to shot when using spot metering. It’s certainly not perfect, but I find it helps in certain situations…give it a try and let us know your results.
Comment by Frank — October 24, 2010 @ 1:54 pm
Btw Neil, my camera’s in manual mode (Canon 7D) and the flash is in E-TTL II Evaluative mode (Canon 550EX), so setting the camera’s metering mode to spot shouldn’t make a difference to the E-TTL flash exposure…go figure.
Comment by Frank — October 24, 2010 @ 2:10 pm
Neil,
I had a tough situation this past weekend. The groom portraits were being shot inside the dark church and he was wearing a deep purple shirt and tie – no white to meter off of. He is caucasian, so I had to balance the dark tux with his light skin tone. Most shots resulted in a disembodied head floating in black space.
Is there a corresponding technique you use to preserve shadows (i.e. darkest relative tone). Would you recommend I meter off of his skin tone for the brightest relative tone? I don’t want to struggle like this again in front of the client and I could use your advise.
Thank you in advance,
Matt
Comment by Matt — October 27, 2010 @ 8:33 am
Comment by Neil vN — October 31, 2010 @ 11:32 pm
Hi Neil! Great article! Thanks!
Somewhere above you said you don’t use spot-metering when using flash…even when metering the bride´s dress you use evaluative, matrix metering? In which situation would you use spot-metering?
Comment by Artur Ocubaro — November 14, 2010 @ 4:39 pm
Comment by Neil vN — November 15, 2010 @ 11:58 pm
Great article Neil – yet another ‘Aha’ moment from you – thanks. I’ll get my Ansel Adams book – The Negative – out again and re-read the section on the zoning system he used.
Comment by Charles Mercer — April 13, 2012 @ 9:26 am
Hello
I am currently taking a wedding course and I am totally confused but after your article I am getting closer to understanding.
I was wondering if the orientation of the camera or zoom length of the lens will affect my spot meter?
If you are in shade do you still need to use the spot meter on the brides dress and open up by 1 to 2 stops?
You indicated you could zoom in instead of using the spot meter. I assume then you would be on evaluative? My teacher had us use the spot meter and get close to the bride to fill in the frame with the dress, did we actually have to do both?
Thanks
Kerri
Comment by Kerri — July 7, 2012 @ 11:51 pm
Comment by Neil vN — July 15, 2012 @ 4:54 pm
Neil,
This makes sense to me for ambient, but not for flash. If the flash was just a fill and dialed down significantly, then I guess it wouldn’t increase the exposure and blow out the dress…but what about exposing for the background and using the flash for the bride/dress? What if we want the bride exposed correctly as well as the background to some extent? The metering method wouldn’t work in that case because the ETTL flash is going to do whatever it wants to get the exposure where it wants it. Then the flash would underexpose the bride due to the bright background? Sorry, I’m getting confused.
Comment by evan watts — July 19, 2012 @ 1:13 am
Evan,
This blog post’s technique does not work for TTL/E-TTL flash.
If you want the background correctly exposed in this example, that means your subject is underexposed. TTL/E-TTL flash will try to expose the bride properly, but you’ll have to adjust the FEC of the flash, because you may not get the dress properly exposed as white on the first take. You have to look at the histogram after each shot and see if you got the picture correctly.
If you want to have full control of both the background and subject using flash, you have to go into manual flash mode.
Comment by Stephen — July 19, 2012 @ 12:13 pm
Thanks Stephen,
Do you think you could still do the zoom in histogram (to check exposure, not for metering obviously)on the dress only if you use manual flash, then zoom out…or would that work only for ambient?
Comment by evan watts — July 19, 2012 @ 2:29 pm
Evan,
Zooming in on your target area, taking a picture, and then using the histogram to verify your brightest relevant tone (white in this case on a bride’s dress) is only 100% guaranteed to work in ambient light only or manual flash. It works in ambient light only, because the only light you have is the ambient light (i.e. sunlight). It also works for manual flash, because you set the flash power, and it never changes between shots (unless you change the flash power later).
TTL/E-TTL uses an algorithm to calculate the amount of flash needed to expose the subject based on what it sees in the viewfinder. Occasionally, the metering will get fooled (i.e. the sun and clouds change ever so slightly, so the light falling on the brides dress is no longer the same metering as when you zoomed in to meter), and the TTL/E-TTL will dump too much or too little light. That is why Neil says in his blog and books that if you use TTL/E-TTL, you can only use the histogram to verify if the shot you just took is correctly exposed. You cannot use the histogram to guarantee that the next shot will be correctly exposed. You ma have to adjust the FEC on the next shot.
With ambient and manual flash, once you verify the exposure in the histogram, you don’t need to make any changes to your settings, because the lighting is always the same (i.e. On a clear day, sunlight changes in intensity over a day, but the intensity between 12 noon and 1pm is negligible, so for all intents and purposes, it’s constant light during that time frame. This is why you can use the “zoom in, take shot, verify in histogram” technique in ambient light only).
Comment by Stephen — July 21, 2012 @ 2:49 pm
Hello Neil
Thanks for a great site which we follow from Australia. I have two questions regarding ‘Exposure metering for the bride/ dress.’
Backgound: practicing shooting indoors with a D700/ 50mm 1.8, under tungsten light I set the ISO at 800 and focussed on the white dress, spot metering while I reset to EV 0 by dropping the shutter speed from 160 to 100 (aperture was already at 1.8). To increase the value by around 1.3 stops, I was limited to adjusting my shutter speed, which left me shooting around 1/60 or 1/30.
Q. In that situation is it smarter to increase the ISO when spot metering/ resetting to EV 0, which will leave me shoot at a more sensible shutter speed?
Q. Once I have set the white dress near +1.3 stops, is the idea to then shoot without compressing/holding the spot meter button?
Thank you,
Stephen
Comment by Stephen D'Arcy — September 11, 2012 @ 12:33 am