Dark and light (10D)

[johnmate]

On my journey getting the most out of the camera (and out of me) some things doesn't always go as I thought they would go. Of course it's my own way of doing something wrong or use settings that don't do the job.

Normally I dive into the manual and look on the web for tips and tutorials. And step by step things go better. That's also the pleasure of the hobby.

One of the things I find difficult is the lightning. I shoot a lot in sunlight and often the pictures are to bright or some pieces are too dark. I experiment with the different metering modes but most of the times I use the Evaluative Metering mode. Also metering the light on dark parts en then move the camera for the final shot doesn't always give the result I want.

For example I took the following picture last week (with evaluative metering). Let's not discuss if the picture is good or not, it's just an example.

> View the picture (http://www.mateboer.com/digitalgallery/21temp/IMG_3953.jpg)

I find the tree on the left side much to dark. The grass and the gate in the middle are good. I wanted the tree to be more visible and have more brightness without changing the background. Of course I know many things can be done with Photoshop but I guess more can be reached in the camera.

Also I understand that every situation is different.

Any tips or suggestions on the lighting subject?

I hope I gave enough information to make myself clear.

[Andy_T]

That looks like one of the most complicated exposures ... if you expose for the tree, you'll blow the highlights, if you expose center-weighted, the picture will look as it does now.

Some ideas....

You could 'expose to the right', but without blowing the highlights :twisted:
Most likely this will involve taking several photos and studying the histogram.

You could deliberately blow the highlights (they're white, anyway), maybe even add some lens flare for some artistic effect.

Fill flash might also help, but there's a big risk that it might look unnatural on that subject.

The final solution would be a tripod and bracketing exposure ... to combine the photos later in photoshop.

Ah yes ... and there is some 'shadow action' that can be used to clear up details in the shadow ... unless they are completely lost in the exposure.

All the ideas I've mentioned can be found on the forum, do a search.

Best regards,
Andy

[Pekka]

You should ask yourself:

does the sky need to be blue?
does the tree need to be green?
does the fence need to be brown?
does the grass need to be green?
what is my main subject?
can I use fill flash?
can I find a better angle by moving around?
can I compose in terms of available light?

In short: if the light is harsh and you exceed dynamic range of the media it's time you make some choices. If the composition and scene is really good but the light is wrong you must either find a better day and better weather (what I would do), or use fill flash/lights (can work depending on subject size and flashes used). If you have no choice but to shoot it at specific hour you will need to decide which parts of the picture are important and if you can change composition, lens or exposure (helped by additional light) to bring those important things out and also to hide out or cover less important items or items you simply can't expose correctly.

It all comes down to the fact that you have to compromise, and find a way to do it so that your compromise serves the photo best.

[Laziferous]

Scenes of high contrast, like the one you shot, is one of the main reasons I'm going to start shooting film (not abandoning digital, just also shooting film). I bought the PBS documentary on Ansel Adams the other day, and was smitten by his darkroom techniques. Film has a much more broad tonal range than digital, and with some dodging and burning, you can really make a print that almost covers the tonal range of the human eye in one exposure. That is impossible with digital at this time (or I just don't know how). When I shoot scenes of high contrast (landscapes), I take two exposures, one metered for shadows, and one for highlights, then make a fairly decent shot by blending them in PS.

Have you considered just bracketing exposures? It won't cost you a thing when shooting digital, less the expense of a tripod (which most people have already), and the time it takes to set the shot up. It works for me when I have no other options, such as a reshoot. Sometimes the light is only perfect for a few minutes... seconds even. You don't have time to search for a new location for a better composition, you just have to "sieze the moment".


Sometimes(stress on sometimes, because I think it's not possible most of the time, and even when it is, the result is never as good as what you could have gotten out of a film negative) you can get away with one shot in digital, if you do spend time in the digital darkroom, and the range between shadows, and highlights wasn't too long. Quick and easy ways to accomplish this are using the multiply, and screen blending modes, along with masks, and gradients. I did that with the pictures linked below. One exposure with a G2, then some multiply/screen layers, masked, along with gradients. Not as good as I could have done with film, but the post processing itself was much less labor intensive, not to mention cheap. Try it for yourself, and see what you can do. Half of the fun is in post processing anyway (IMO).

http://gallery.bytephoto.com/data/3072/6CRW_5468.jpg
http://gallery.bytephoto.com/data/3072/6CRW_5729-small.jpg

[johnmate]

Thank you for your ideas and tips. You have gave me input to think about. Let's continue the journey!