Ajay (or now dont.care or whatever you plan on being tomorrow), you claimed that anyone using the camera’s automatic modes who thinks it’s right can look at the histogram and see how wrong it is. But you edited what you said, materially changed your references from “proper exposure” to “balanced exposure”, and, removed some of your snotty comments like “Gee do you teach lessons?”.
You’re right, histograms are ‘relative’ to pixels, from 0 – 255 in luminance value.. and luminance is how black or white a pixel is.. Tell me again how this isn’t relative to determining a balanced/properly exposed image?
The luminance of a pixel in reference to proper exposure only makes sense when you know what the luminance SHOULD BE. Knowing the relative values means nothing without a reference point. This is usually a gray card, or a gray/white/black card, or a color palette card. That is a fundamental concept you’re missing.
So, since you’re retroactively editing things, I’m going to assume you’re retracting your stance that histogram shows proper exposure and reveals poor camera auto modes. Because, if you believed that, you’d be pretty ignorant on what the histogram does.
BTW, excellent use of editing skills. Going back and materially changing your statement when called out after acting like a jerk? And then changing your name on the forums when called out by name? Pure Awesomeness. Perhaps you should go add in use of a reference luminance or gray card on your first post. That’d be Double Super Awesomeness and nobody would know!