Bracketing

[msvadi]

I was reading Ansel Adams "Examples" and I was surprised by one sentence. In the description of "Moonrise" (absolutely amazing photo) he wrote:

"I was at a loss with the subject luminance values, and I CONFESS I was thinking of bracketing several exposures ..."

So, what's the problem with bracketing? He made sound absolutely unprofessional. Did I miss something?

[maderito]

I was reading Ansel Adams "Examples" and I was surprised by one sentence. In the description of "Moonrise" (absolutely amazing photo) he wrote:

"I was at a loss with the subject luminance values, and I CONFESS I was thinking of bracketing several exposures ..."

So, what's the problem with bracketing? He made sound absolutely unprofessional. Did I miss something?

Ansel Adams allegedly said or wrote: "Bracketing is for photographers who have failed to master the craft."

That would be ME. :shock:

[MrChevy]

And me :)

[Vegas Poboy]

It's always good to bracket even when you're a Pro.
Better to be safe than sorry

[msvadi]

I have to admit that I'm disappointed by that book. The photos are amazing. Some of them are just perfect (Moon and Half Dome, Winter Sunrise and especially Moonrise. I can spend hours looking at that picture). But I did not enjoy reading the book at all.

[sdommin]

So, what's the problem with bracketing? He made sound absolutely unprofessional. Did I miss something?

Adams believed in "previsualization", where you study the scene and get all the tonal values set in your mind before you click the shutter - if you can perfect this, you won't need to bracket.

But more importantly, he used large format sheet film. It was impractical for him to go out with more than just a few plates. He couldn't waste film (and processing time) by bracketing to get the exposure "just right".

Aren't you glad we have digital?

[msvadi]

Aren't you glad we have digital?

I really am ;) I don't think that I would be taking any pictures without digital ;)

[Laziferous]

I don't think that I would be taking any pictures without digital ;)
Neither would I!

[shelbix2020]

thats the only way to insure a good shot .. I mean I take 6 or 7 shots of the same thing (if I can) just to make sure it comes out the way I want it, you cant trust the LCD it too small and the resolution is horrible compared to your monitor or a print. I cant see how it would make you any less of a "profressional" by bracketing, as long as one of the shots is perfect :wink:

[stopbath]

thats the only way to insure a good shot .. I mean I take 6 or 7 shots of the same thing (if I can) just to make sure it comes out the way I want it, you cant trust the LCD it too small and the resolution is horrible compared to your monitor or a print. I cant see how it would make you any less of a "profressional" by bracketing, as long as one of the shots is perfect :wink:
The only way to really ensure a good shot is to previsualize and know your craft. Bracketing is a good replacement for that skill since it likely may produce a shot close to what you could have figured out.

[VicGlass]

I was reading Ansel Adams "Examples" and I was surprised by one sentence. In the description of "Moonrise" (absolutely amazing photo) he wrote:

"I was at a loss with the subject luminance values, and I CONFESS I was thinking of bracketing several exposures ..."

So, what's the problem with bracketing? He made sound absolutely unprofessional. Did I miss something?

What this sentence means is that it is possible to get a perfect exposure in most instances by correctly using a light meter. However a small number of situations are very difficult to meter correctly, and then bracketing may be necessary.

But, why not bracket ALL the time? Won't that insure that the exposure is correct? When a photographer brackets, by definition he/she is UNCERTAIN of the correct exposure. If you bracket all of the time then you are UNCERTAIN of the exposure all of the time. That doe not sound like a good state of affairs, doe it?

Instead one could learn about metering and exposure. The first thing to understand is that the built in meter in the camera, although excellent, is easily fooled. It is based on determining what part of the picture is medium gray - and if it gets that wrong then you have a bad exposure. Take snow for example. If you go with a meter reading of snow the snow will turn out grey.

[Laziferous]

We have to remember what medium Adams was working with also. Film has such a broader range than digital. For those of us using G-series cameras, it is just plain impossible to recreate such a wide range of tones in one exposure. The camera is simply incapable of doing so, no matter how you meter. You either have to choose what you want to be under/over exposed, or take two exposures and blend them yourself, or, the evil that is... bracketing.

DSLR cameras are much more capable at capturing the tonal range found in film, and are even becoming better as technology allows. For those of us with humble G-series cameras, well.... we have to do what we have to do to make the shot.

I know it's not expected by DSLR owners or users of film for us (G-users) to have shots of near, or equal quality, but they sure are impressed when it occasionally happens :wink:

[RichardtheSane]

Also I believe Adams used large format film for a lot of his work.
I am not experienced in this area, but is suspect the fact you have to change the film for every exposure, or at least very frequently (and the high cost of large format) makes it more difficult to bracket.

[msvadi]

DSLR cameras are much more capable at capturing the tonal range found in film, and are even becoming better as technology allows. For those of us with humble G-series cameras, well.... we have to do what we have to do to make the shot.


I did not know that. I'm afraid that I'll just go and by D70 when it hits the shelves ;)

[dtrayers]

I did not know that. I'm afraid that I'll just go and by D70 when it hits the shelves ;)

Oh Moderator!! Heretic over here! :P

[msvadi]

I hope people from Canon monitor this forum:

You should put "spot metering" on your DSLRs!!! Canon, can you hear me? ;)

[iwatkins]

Ansel had a point. If you were spending who knows how much for every plate of film, then you would also want to avoid bracketing shots.

In addition, if you have a handheld light meter and know how too use it, then with a high latitude film (B&W tends to be high latitude), you should only need one exposure.

I don't think any of that is really relevant to digital SLR usage.

On the 10D for instance it is a couple of buttons presses to get into auto bracket mode. Another couple of seconds to take three shots at different exposures. That is it and has cost you nothing, not in film costs nor in time.

If you relying on the internal meter and have a difficult to expose for scene (e.g. sunset, landscape) then there is nothing wrong with bracketing shots, either manually or with auto bracket.

Add to that that a scence as described above may have a large latitude, i.e. way outside what the sensor can actually capture in a single exposure, and it becomes obvious that bracketing *is* the only way to capture the whole scene.

I will quite often set the camera to auto bracket, usually by 1.5 stops either side, set up on a tripod with cable release. Get a good mid tone exposure reading and set the camera for that reading.

Then click, click, click, I have three exposures of the same scene (ok, 0.33 seconds apart) and then I can combine them in Photoshop later to give me the shot I want.

The benefit is that the shadows have a lot more detail (taken from the overexposed (+1.5) shot and the highlights have more detail and less blow outs (taken from the underexposed (-1.5) shot). With the midtones taken from the normal shot everything is dandy and you get the dynamic range I wanted. It is fairly easy then to adjust the individual layers to get a natural looking shot.

Cheers

Ian

[swampthing]

Just a thought here....

Bracketing (as I understand it) involves taking 3 or more shots at slightly different exposure levels, say 'normal', 1/2 a stop under, and 1/2 a stop over. You then 'pick the one that is closest to the effect you wanted.

Now, if you shoot a single photograph in RAW mode, can you not adjust the exposure up or down in the post-processing stage, and achieve the same effect, but only taking up a single 'frame' on your memory card?

[dtrayers]

Now, if you shoot a single photograph in RAW mode, can you not adjust the exposure up or down in the post-processing stage, and achieve the same effect, but only taking up a single 'frame' on your memory card?

Yes and no. Yes, RAW mode does allow for a little more exposure latitude, and 1/2 stop isn't unreasonable.

No, there's a cost when you adjust exposure in RAW, typically in the shadow areas in the form of noise.

Think of changing exposure in RAW conversion as boosting the pixel values to a new value. Say a pixel at 128 is now 135. The problem is that your increasing the values of the noise as well. You're better off having the ligtht from the scene set the pixel value at 135 to start with.

[nosquare2003]

Just a thought here....

Bracketing (as I understand it) involves taking 3 or more shots at slightly different exposure levels, say 'normal', 1/2 a stop under, and 1/2 a stop over. You then 'pick the one that is closest to the effect you wanted.



Again, yes and no. If you pick a good photo, why bother. If not, you may do the blending as discussed in "The Luminous Landscape":
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/digital-blending.shtml

Or you may buy from Fredmiranda a Photoshop plugin (I haven't got it myself though):
http://www.fredmiranda.com/shopping/DRI

I don't do much bracketing by the way.

[PhotosGuy]

What exposure should Ansel Adams have calculated for the moon, the brightest part of the pic, assuming f-16 and ISO (actually, at that time, ASA) of 50?

[msvadi]

In his book "Examples" he explained how he determined the exposure for the Moon (I assume you mean the "Moonrise" picture). I don't remember the details.

[maderito]

Trick question ... What exposure should Ansel Adams have calculated for the moon, the brightest part of the pic, assuming f-16 and ISO (actually, at that time, ASA) of 50?
I'm game. . .

The moon is illuminated by the sun and is visible day or night. On a sunny day, the moon is near Zone V. Applying the "Sunny16 rule" (exposure = 1/16, 1/ASA sec for correct exposure on a sunny day) and moving the moon to Zone IX as the brightest object:

Moon in Zone V: exposure = 1/ASA = 1/50 sec
Moon in Zone IX: exposure = 1/2 sec (about)

So expose at f/16 and 1/2 sec to give a black sky and very bright moon.

And of course ... bracket! (f/16 @ 1 sec, 1/2 sec, 1/4 sec). Maybe one of the shots would show the moon surface with some detail.


Did I get tricked :?.

[PhotosGuy]

Maderito, you got it! Even after I'd taught the "Sunny16 rule", most people would think "night" instead of asking themselves where the light on the subject was coming from. (Very relevant if the subject of a portrait is standing next to a red or blue sunlit wall - interesting colors!)

Maybe I shouldn't have said "Trick question"?
Msvadi, I did warn you...
;-D

[msvadi]

I missed the trick part ;)

[Pekka]

I hope people from Canon monitor this forum:

You should put "spot metering" on your DSLRs!!! Canon, can you hear me? ;)

1D, 1Ds and 1D Mark II has it.

The dilemma is that with digital era many amateurs have advanced fast to "very advanced amateurs" (meaning that they are practically pro level in knowledge and habits without earning their living with it) but they can only afford amateur/semipro level cameras which Canon must have branded for average amateurs who do not really need spot metering and 1/3 DoF focusing.

[PhotosGuy]

stopbath said: "The only way to really ensure a good shot is to previsualize and know your craft. Bracketing is a good replacement for that skill since it likely may produce a shot close to what you could have figured out."True. Relating to transparency film, there are (were?) other valid reasons for bracketing:
1. I once worked with a stereotypical German photographer. Verrrry precise in his calculations. He came back from a 2-day shoot with 3 rolls of 36. Unfortunately, on the trip out, something glitched the diaphragm on his primary lens & it was stuck on wide open. The client was not amused, & who could disagree with him? After all costs for me, transportation, lodging (except for the time I billed $12.00 total for TWO nights in the "Hotel"!), etc are added up, film is the smallest consideration. So I used it - typically 60+ rolls of 36 a day. (I'll put a typical "workflow" at the bottom.)

2. Bracketing will produce "The" correct exposure.
3. Bracketing gives extra close exposures that fit nicely into your Sample files.
4. Bracketing gives extra close exposures that the art directors & clients can fingerprint & scratch.
5. Bracketing gives extra close exposures when the inevitable dust speck embeds itself onto the "money Shot".
6. Bracketing allows one situation to be spread out over several rolls. See "workflow" for why this is important.

Workflow:
Before you go, get all the film for that job in the same batch number, hopefully from the same vendor. We had freezers filled with it. (Pro films were 'aged' to be at their peak right now!). Shoot & process one roll in each body to be sure everything's OK before you go. When you get there, check everything out.

At the location:
Situation 1: First primary subject - seven stop bracket using f-stops. First variation on the primary subject - 5-stop bracket using shutter speeds. Next variation - 5-stop bracket using another body. (OK, so I'm insecure, but I've seen it all happen. How about the time in Italy when the town photo processor was asked to make 8X10" contact sheets of B&W film we'd shot over the weekend to identify locations we'd be using that week? He used his lovely deckel edge trimmer to cut out every shot &gave us 105 1" X 1-1/2" prints... without edge numbers.)
Watching the ADs try to assemble the jigsaw puzzle was a "trip" in itself. ;)

Situation 2: Second primary subject - repeat as above. Maybe drop down to 3-stop brackets if I shoot a lot of variations & my level of confidence that I've got it is up.

After the shoot:
NEVER ship more than 20% of the film out in one batch.
NEVER process more than 20% of the film in one batch.
NEVER process more than ½ the rolls of a variation in one batch.

Bottom line, bracketing was just carrying CYA to it's logical conclusion; the client doesn't care that "the dog ate your pics". If it's even slightly under your control, then you had better have controlled it! Now, with histograms, a Gig of mem cards, & back-up film SLRs, things can be more relaxed. Sigh!

Edit: We also shot 8X10" transparency sheet film in brackets: 2 "Normal" exposures & +1/-1 & +2/-2 stops.
One of the "Normal" exposures would be processed first. Then the rest would be push/pull processed based on the "Normal" result. We'd get some nice contrast & color balance variations that the ad guys loved.

Sometimes we'd shoot several frames of small format on the start of a roll to cut off (Clips) to check developing time before the rest of the roll, or the rest of the job was processed.

Oh, Msvadi, I just visited your site - some very nice stuff!

[msvadi]

Oh, Msvadi, I just visited your site - some very nice stuff!

Thank you very much, Frank. :)

[msvadi]

Thanks for a response, Pekka :)
Oh, I wish I could afford any of 1D series cameras. Not going to happen ;)


I hope people from Canon monitor this forum:

You should put "spot metering" on your DSLRs!!! Canon, can you hear me? ;)

1D, 1Ds and 1D Mark II has it.

The dilemma is that with digital era many amateurs have advanced fast to "very advanced amateurs" (meaning that they are practically pro level in knowledge and habits without earning their living with it) but they can only afford amateur/semipro level cameras which Canon must have branded for average amateurs who do not really need spot metering and 1/3 DoF focusing.

[4walls]

Thanks for a response, Pekka :)
Oh, I wish I could afford any of 1D series cameras. Not going to happen ;)


I hope people from Canon monitor this forum:

You should put "spot metering" on your DSLRs!!! Canon, can you hear me? ;)

1D, 1Ds and 1D Mark II has it.

The dilemma is that with digital era many amateurs have advanced fast to "very advanced amateurs" (meaning that they are practically pro level in knowledge and habits without earning their living with it) but they can only afford amateur/semipro level cameras which Canon must have branded for average amateurs who do not really need spot metering and 1/3 DoF focusing.I have to admit looking seriously at the D70 as well.

[msvadi]

I have been told that Canon lenses are much better than Nikon. I have been told also that one uses lens much longer than a body. Of course, with the prices of digital SLR cameras it might be a little bit different. Or may be with digital it's even more true given how fast the technology developes. Still, one has to be sure if he wants to build his system around Nikon or Canon lens.

[msvadi]

I BOUGHT A DIGITAL REBEL!!! ;)


I did not know that. I'm afraid that I'll just go and by D70 when it hits the shelves ;)

Oh Moderator!! Heretic over here! :P

[toddb]

I always associated bracketing with gathering greater tonal range as our eyes would see it and our cameras fail to. I read were many say this is "manipulating" the image when you put images together to create an greater tonal range, but if it looks more like what you can see with your naked eye, then I'd say that a non-bracket shot is farther from truth (which is alway subject to the beholder anyway). I sure have allot of problems still with getting perfect exposure...can't wait until the stop range increases on these cameras. :-)

[dharris]

That really makes me have mixed emotions about his choice of words. My other favorite photographer in life Bracketed many of his exposures (Galen Rowell).

[Sam North]

Why bracket at all when you can check the histogram?

;)

[dharris]

Why bracket at all when you can check the histogram?

;)

I agree! So when you check your histogram and the shot did not come out as desired, what do you do next? You delete and re-take the shot, right? So during the "golden hour" when time can be critical, I find it easy to bracket the shots and sort at a later time.

When using film, bracket is almost a must...

[dharris]

Why bracket at all when you can check the histogram?

;)

By the way, nice website.