metering

[dsze]

Ok, I've read some on metering and understand it, but I would like advice on what others would do and why in this situation.

I shoot alot of wakeboarding action, and early morning sessions are great because there are few other boats in the background. However, there is this one stretch where the sun is behind the rider and my old 300D and now my 10D too, get fooled by the bright sun behind the rider. It also sometimes gets fooled when the sun is in front of the rider, but bright reflections are coming off of the water.


thanks,
daniel

[robertwgross]

There may or may not be metering solutions.

However, can't you simply try to line up the shot differently so that you aren't shooting into the sun? If you shoot with your back to the sun, then the subject and the water should be illuminated decently.

---Bob Gross---

[dsze]

Yeah, I could always wait until we are going the opposite direction on that stretch, but then I am left with half the shooting time. I'd prefer to find a way to get 1 or 2 descent shots during this stretch if there is a way. I do need to play around a bit more with partial metering. I think that may help. I'll try to get that done tomorrow morning.

thanks,
daniel

[dsze]

I should probably have explained the situation a bit more for non-skiers. Typically, we look for the "glass" or smooth water so that we can focus on our technique and not on 'fighting the chop.' So, if there is a wind or other boats out, we head to a stretch of shoreline that is protected on 3 sides by trees, so the wind is not a factor in 'chopping' up the 'glass.' So, we head East & West along this stretch and turn around and hit the stretch again. If I can only shoot when we're going one direction, then I miss have of my opportunities to get that 'one good one.'

I guess I was just hoping for some backlit techniques that people have had some success with. I suppose this could be post proc. as well.

thanks,
daniel

[drisley]

I would use AV or whatever mode you use, and get a good exposure from a normal shot.
Then I would switch to M, and dial in the readings you got above.
That way the boarder will be in decent exposure through all the shots.
Also, shooting RAW would really help using this method.

This is what I do in tricky lighting with fast moving objects. I get the initial reading once, then dial everything in M.
Works well for me so far.

[dsze]

So, essentially you are saying to get a 'normal' exposure with the sun on the riders face and then use those same settings for when the Sun is behind him? This is pretty much what I do already, except for the times that my camera gets 'tricked,' which I believe has to be caused by the evaluative metering. I always shoot in manual. Coming from the AE-1, its just as quick or quicker for me to always use manual than to figure out what mode I'm in and adjust from there. So, my settings are usually the same, but I'm guessing the eval. metering with the backlit and the bright water reflections are 'fooling' the camera. I mean the overall exposure is still correct, but the rider is washed out or dark sometimes.

So, would you then prefer partial or center-weighted metering?

-thanks,

[randyk]

I think what you need is spot metering, which the 10D doesn't have. Spot using a small point (about 3%) of the center of the frame to set exposure.

Similar to what someone else said, I think your best chance would be to lock focus and exposure in the other direction, then try this setting going the other way.

[scottbergerphoto]

This is a typical "backlighting" situation. The background is much brighter then the subject. You have a couple of options:
1. Use a spot meter to meter off the subject to get a reading. If you don't have a separate spot meter, put a zoom lens on your camera and fill the viewfinder with your subject. Record the meter settings from the camera and put them in Manually. Bear in mind that in this situation, you will get a properly exposed subject and blown out background.
2. Fill Flash. Use Av or M and set the exposure for the background. Use a decent flash like the 550EX in ETTL. Check your distance from the subject:
Max Distance = 55meters/fstop. If you need more disatnce you can get a flash extender like the Better Beamer which has a lens that extends the reach of the flash. Disable any Automatic Reduction of fill flash. Dial in -1 to 1 2/3 FEC depending on your distance and taste.
3. Use a large reflector( photoflex, foam core, large board covered with tin foil that was crumpled and straightened back out) to kick some of the sunlight back at the subject.
Regards,
Scott

[Malaxos1]

I did a wedding last weekend and I had simillar light situations. What I did was use a CPL filter to and a smaller apeture. what I got was some detail in the sky and decent subject exposure. I always shoot in M mode and use partial meter, this is the closest to spot.

[dsze]

Thanks! Sounds like some good advice. I just got home from trying to shoot some fireworks...waiting for the images to load to the computer to see if I got anything worth keeping. I"ll be back on the boat wakeboarding in about 8 hrs though...

thanks,
daniel

[ootsk]

You say your camera gets "tricked" by the evaluative metering? If you use manual exposure this will not happen.
I shoot sailboat races....and I always use manual settings. If left up to the camera to decide, the exposures would ALWAYS be different, depending if I focus on a white hull, blue water, dark or light sail, etc.
Manual is the only way to go in this type of shooting. I also use manually selected white balance for the same reason. AWB would be inconsistent if used automatically.
What I would do....shoot a shot in manual mode....5.6 @ 250...zoom in on wakeboarder and see if it's what you want. Adjust from there, one shot at a time until you get the exposure correct.
This will now be the correct exposure for you during this particular run. When going the other direction you may need to adjust a little, but maybe not.
This works for me.
Mike

[dsze]

Well, I got a few shots this morning in the bright sun. I think you can still tell which shots were backlit, but they are still usable shots I think. See what you think:

http://home.insightbb.com/~photographs/wakeboarding/index.htm

Some on this page are old shots, but the first 7 are all from today.

Thanks for all the advice!
-daniel

[dsze]

ootsk.... I'm not sure what you mean? The metering is still selectable when shooting fully manual? What do you mean when you say that tricking the camera is not possible in manual shooting? Can't the camera still get fooled by backlighting in say, an evaluative metering? I'm not trying to disagree with you, I just need some more explanation I guess.

thanks,
daniel

[ootsk]

I might not have explained it correctly...
When you set the camera to "M" the camera can not be fooled...because you are setting the exposure yourself...and it won't change based on backlighting.

Evaluative,spot,etc does not matter with manual mode.


What might be throwing you off is the under/over exposure gauge in your viewfinder. You can NOT use this, once you have your proper exposure dialed in, as it is using the selected metering mode, and this is most likely being skewed by backlighting.

So once again...and this only works with digital: Take a few test shots...look at the histogram, and look at the image blown up in your LCD on your camera back. Adjust your settings so the part of the picture you want is properly exposed. This may take 2-4 tries to get it just right. Then leave your settings alone. These settings should not need to be changed unless there's significant clouds temporarily blocking the sun, or if you go into shadowy areas.

This will greatly improve your consistancy with fast-moving objects.
Unfortunately on bright days you might have the background totally blown out..that's the limitations of digital. 5 stops or so. When this happens to me, I try to decrease the amount of bright areas by changing my angle to the subject. If I'm shooting a pitcher and there's sky in the background, I get a higher angle so there's less sky and more grass. Sometimes a polarizer helps with this also.

I hope this helps explain my thoughts.
Mike

[hmhm]

What a few wise posters are trying to suggest is that while the camera's metering will come up with dramatically different guesses as to the correct exposure, depending on whether you're pointing the camera at the sun or not, the actual correct exposure will not change dramatically from shot to shot. Your job is to figure out what this correct exposure is, and then stick with it. You "stick with it" by going to the manual (M) exposure mode, and dialing in your selected aperture/shutter and leaving it alone.

There are different ways to determine this exposure. Probably the best is to try a few shots and see which looks best in preview and in the histogram, and stick with that exposure. If you want to get real old school, try the "sunny 16 rule" by using f/16 and 1/ISO (e.g. 1/100 for ISO 100). Obviously, you can adjust the aperture down and shutter up, e.g. f/8 and 1/400 or f/4 and 1/1600 . Who needs metering?
-harry

[Aylwin]

Just a note on spot metering vs. partial metering. Since we know the 10D has no spot metering, then partial metering is the only option. As already mentioned, you should zoom in (using a longer lens if needed) but it's not necessary to fill the viewfinder. For partial metering, all you have to do is fill the circle in the middle.

[scottbergerphoto]

I might not have explained it correctly...
When you set the camera to "M" the camera can not be fooled...because you are setting the exposure yourself...and it won't change based on backlighting.

Evaluative,spot,etc does not matter with manual mode.


Mike
That statement is incorrect or at least misleading. If you are using the camera meter and not a hand held spot meter, the kind of metering you select will affect the reading that you get and dial in manually. The only way to avoid that is to zoom in so that the subject you want to expose properly fills the viewfinder or if you are using Partial Metering, fills the partial metering circle.
Scott

[scottbergerphoto]

ootsk.... I'm not sure what you mean? The metering is still selectable when shooting fully manual? What do you mean when you say that tricking the camera is not possible in manual shooting? Can't the camera still get fooled by backlighting in say, an evaluative metering? I'm not trying to disagree with you, I just need some more explanation I guess.

thanks,
daniel
You are correct. In Manual mode you are still stuck with the limitations of each of the selectable metering modes. That is why there is still a big market for hand held spot meters. I recently bought the Sekonic L558 for Spot, Flash and Ambient metering. See my response above to OOTSK.
Scott

[dsze]

Thanks Scott and Ootsk, Aylwin & hmhm. Thats what I thought you meant ootsk, and I understand what you are saying. But what I was trying to say is exactly what Scott put in better terms for me. Simply switching my 10D to manual (which I always shoot in anyway, does not disable the selectable metering. However, I do understand your point about using partial metering and filling the center circle with subject and exposing for that area only (not the background). And at wakeboarding distance from the boat I think I can do that with my 70-200.

So, my next question for you guys is this; If I'm in M and Partial Metering, and I fill the center circle with the rider and take a shot.....then what exactly will my histogram be telling me? That is, will the histogram represent the entire frame or will it represent only the area that was inside the center circle (9%) of the frame?

This has me concerned because we know that the LCD is not a particularly accurate representation of exposure. So, if neither the LCD or the histogram will allow me to spot meter (partial meter with zoomlens), then a handheld is the only other sure way to go?

thanks,
daniel

[robertwgross]

The histogram is based on the entire captured frame. It would be meaningless if it did anything else.

---Bob Gross---

[dsze]

Robert,

but for this particular type of situation, it might be more beneficial if the histo. were based on the part of the frame that was used for metering-? The whole frame is not what I'm concerned with exposing. I don't think that would make it meaningless would it?

[ootsk]

The histogram is a very useful tool...I use it all the time, and I think it would be beneficial to have it represent the whole frame, not just the part that is metered.

I'm still sticking with my suggestions about taking outdoor action pictures. I've always used manual mode, and I couldn't even tell you waht metering mode I am using.

Hmmm explained it much better than I can.


Save the money on the metering.

Mike

[dsze]

Yes, I understand that the histogram is a very useful tool and I use it all the time too. However, if it is taking into account the entire frame, then it actually tells you nothing about the exposure of the subject (wakeboarder) in a highly backlit frame. And, we also know that the LCD is not an accurate representation of the exposure.

And yes, I am shooting in Manual. As I've said several times, I always shoot in manual. Shooting in manual does not negate the metering mode however. If you can find a good metering mode for what you're doing then you can use the camera's exposure guide (the little needle thing). As was suggested, if you can get the subject (wakeboarder) to fill the center circle in partial mode...then in theory you dont have to guess at the exposure. By using the histogram with a backlit frame, you are guessing at exposure. By using the LCD with any frame, you are guessing at exposure.

-daniel

[robertwgross]

but for this particular type of situation, it might be more beneficial if the histo. were based on the part of the frame that was used for metering-? The whole frame is not what I'm concerned with exposing. I don't think that would make it meaningless would it?

Simply put, it doesn't work that way.

I can't see any point to a histogram that was based only on the meter point.

---Bob Gross---

[dsze]

Really? You don't see any advantage to being able to view some sort of graph (maybe not the traditional histogram) for say the 9% area of the partial metering center circle? Or let me ask you this; what good does a histogram do in the situation being discussed? What good is the histogram in determining exposure for a seriously backlit subject? Maybe I'm wrong and there is a way to read the histogram correctly in this situation. It just seems to me that a great deal of the data will be to the right as the background will be blown out and the rest of the data, one must assume is mostly the subject....but ?

-daniel

[alsmith]

Call me silly but if you fill the frame with the wakeboarder and take a picture do you not have a histogram for the center of the shot when you zoom back out. So you can set the closeup so the histogram is right, set your M exposures based on that closeup histogram, and then shoot the others and see what happens.

[scottbergerphoto]

The histogram reflects the final capture, not just what you focused on. It doesn't care what you focused on. It is a graphical representaion of the color/light intensity that hit the sensor during the time the shutter is open.
Scott

[dsze]

Yes! I understand what a histogram is and I use it all the time! I'm not questioning what a histogram is or how it works. All I am saying is that it doesn't do much good for determining exposure on a backlit frame. (or at least I don't know how to use a histogram to make sense of exposure in a backlit frame).

alsmith; Yes! If I could fill the frame with the rider and read the histo. for that, then yes it would be useful in this situation. I'm essentially talking about doing the same thing by having some sort of graph that would only represent data for the metered 9% of the frame (center circle in partial mode). My 70-200 isn't nearly long enough to do that though. And its the longest I have at this point. I understand that this is not what a histogram does and I know we don't have anything on camera that will do this. I was simply saying that it might be useful.

ootsk said that a histo. that displayed only the 9% center circle data would be meaningless and I don't see it that way. I think it could be useful....not for it to stay that way all the time, but maybe be able to switch histo modes or something like that. This would further help to elliminate the need for a hand held unit, unless I'm missing something. Which is totally possible.

-daniel

[robertwgross]

Instead of dreaming about how you think it ought to work, I think it would be a more productive use of your time to learn how it does work.

You know, the designers at Canon are not stupid. They've poured a few decades of experience into designing cameras that make more and more sense for the user. Once you have spent a few decades at it, then you can start your dreaming again.

---Bob Gross---

[dsze]

haha..... are you serious? Take it easy Robert. I wasn't trying to say that the Godly Canon Company wasn't perfect. Relax man. I guess thats what I get for "dreaming" eh? And for the last time, I know how a histogram works. I didn't know that it was such a crime to have a discussion about something. No, I haven't been building cameras for a couple of decades. SO WHAT! Why be a jerk about it and tell me that I can start dreaming again after I've been at it for a couple of decades? Is that really necessary? If you don't want to be a part of this discussion then don't. Why because you have 2000 posts here do you think that it is ok to put your nose up and act like this to people who are relatively new? I hate it when forums get like this. All I was doing was talking about something that I fully realize doesn't exist. Does that mean that everything we have at this very point in time is absolutely perfect and so we shouldn't ever discuss "dreams" as you put it? Come on man, relax a little.

"Instead of dreaming about how you think it ought to work, I think it would be a more productive use of your time to learn how it does work."

...this little quote from you really gets me. You are hilarious! You, the one with over 2000 posts on a photography forum, are telling me to go out and learn to shoot instead of having a discussion online? HA HA. You can't be serious!

Where is all of this coming from? I've had great discussions and recieved wonderful help from you on here before. Why all of the sudden do you type to me like I am a child instead of discussing the issue or at least passing on to another thread? I don't understand. I surely wasn't trying to offend anyone with my, "dreaming." If I did, then I'm sorry. I never called the "designers" as you call them, at Canon, stupid. I was simply thinking for myself and yes, maybe dreaming a little bit. Why have you taken such offense to that? I don't understand where your hatred comes from?

-daniel

[robertwgross]

Maybe throw aside the paranoid delusions and get back to the subject of the thread.

Most of us prefer to discuss f-stops and focal lengths, and not your perceptions of hatred.

---Bob Gross---

[dsze]

....oH, by the way Robert.... you forgot to explain to me how it does work? If you can explain to me how exactly I should be using a histogram to judge exposure on a backlit frame then I will crawl in a hole and play with my camera and not come out or post another message here until I am a photography master...Ok?

[dsze]

Haha...paranoid delusions.... you are the one who's posting non-sense 1 and 2 liners and not actually offering any real advice! Re-read through the posts on this thread Robby, yours are the only ones that don't offer anything to a learner. You simply state things like, "it just doesnt work that way," "stop dreaming," "learn how it works." ....very helpful stuff. Thanks for your contribution.... lol....this is funny...anyway, I'm heading back out on the lake now. Maybe I can figure out how it works so that I can stop being delusional and dreamy. Maybe we can be friends again tomorrow Robert. :(

-daniel

[robertwgross]

If you will get off your soapbox for a second, go back and read some of the earlier posts in this thread, like from scottbergerphoto. Set aside the animosity and think about what is going on in the camera.

You have several tools available in the camera to help you get a good exposure. Before the shot, you have dynamic metering that is updating continually, and different metering modes. You have automatic modes and manual modes. You have exposure compensation. Then after the shot, you have the limited review of the captured image. You have a histogram.

If you try to solve the problem at hand with only one of your tools, you might continually get fooled. Where you can gain experience is to assess the input from each of your tools, and then let the eyeball and brain make a good guess about which tools are likely to be fooled, and which tools are likely to lead you closer to the right exposure. When you get into a difficult shooting situation, like backlighting, nobody said that it was easy.

Lastly, when I get into a tricky exposure situation, and I just can't quite get it right, then I just bracket the hell out of it. If, due to wide dynamic range, it still just can't be gotten right, then I say "to hell with it" and move on to a more productive shot.

No hatred here.

---Bob Gross---

[ootsk]

um, please don't misquote me. I NEVER said anything about the histogram being meaningless if it only displayed 9%,,,yada,yada,yada.

I've explained a few times how I shoot in situations like these. A third time won't help.

A white, blown out background will cause a spike in the far right side of a histogram. Review a picture with a subject that's well exposed, with a blown out background, and see what the histogram looks like. Where is the other spike?

Your thoughts on what histograms should show might have some merit, I don't know. Canon would be the ones to argue that point with. I've learned to read mine for the shots I take. If i'm doing portraits against a black background, I don't allow the camera to make ANY decisions. Those decisions will be wrong, and I know that. I set the exposure as I've explained before, and leave it at that. Ignore any metering decisions your camera might make.

My .02, and the last of my comments on this topic.

[Ken Fong]

Hi Daniel,
Great shots! Have you also explored using the gray card? It's always a low-tech favorite. This assumes that when you meter on the card, it is an accurate representation of what is happening out on the water. But then again, I'm not sure what effect the distance has between metering the gray card up close, then zooming out to take your subject...overall, it sounds like not enough time to react. Can you get the subject to wear a gray lifejacket that you can meter off of? :)

[scottbergerphoto]

Hi Daniel,
Great shots! Have you also explored using the gray card? It's always a low-tech favorite. This assumes that when you meter on the card, it is an accurate representation of what is happening out on the water. But then again, I'm not sure what effect the distance has between metering the gray card up close, then zooming out to take your subject...overall, it sounds like not enough time to react. Can you get the subject to wear a gray lifejacket that you can meter off of? :)
You don't need a grey card. As long as your in the same light as the subject you can use your hand. If your a caucasoid as I am, just decrease the reading off your hand by 1 stop. That wasn't the problem raised though. The problem of backlighting is not solved by a grey card or substitute.
Scott

[dsze]

Thanks for the advice and the compliment on the shots Ken. Ootsk, you are right. I did mis-quote you. I appologize. It was robert who stated that a histogram representing anything but the entire frame would be meaningless.

Robert, you're bracketing idea might be something to try. I always forget about bracketing because I typically am shooting moving things (wakeboarders, kids). With AEB, you have to take 3 consecutive frames right? As fast as a wakeboarder flips from one wake to the other, I would have 3 completely different compositions. But, that might be a quick way to look at three exposures to see which looks best (on LCD) as a starting point, without regard for composition.

Anyway, maybe I'll get back out in the boat tomorrow morning. BTW, I need a photographer to shoot me behind the boat. I never have any shots of myself because everyone who is not into photography is affraid to pick up my camera. :)

-daniel

[robertwgross]

Robert, you're bracketing idea might be something to try. I always forget about bracketing because I typically am shooting moving things (wakeboarders, kids). ...


Hey, bracketing is not the most precise of techniques. But, if you can gain any insight into what works, then you might as well try it. Besides, even if you get only one good one out of three, then that is one more than you might get otherwise.

One thing that I learned from bracketing is how deep to bracket. I learned that for a fairly normal scene, shot through by Canon film camera on Velvia, there is little point in bracketing deeper than +1/2 or -1/2. On a Canon digital, I find that its more sophisticated metering can be fooled differently, so I sometimes bracket +1 or -1, then study the histogram, and then sometimes try +1/2 or -1/3, just depending on what's going on. Of course, with your action scene changing so rapidly, that may not help much.

---Bob Gross---

[dsze]

Yeah, I could bracket a series or two when the rider is just behind the boat warming up and look at the way the histograms differ.

The one shot, (#370) was very backlit and turned out descent I think. That shot was very underexposed and then I adjusted things in post. This way I didn't have to completely blow out the background (not that there was anything there anyway)...but it did create a little noise I think.

-daniel

[robertwgross]

I saw some waterski photographers working at a federal lake one time. Along one shore of the lake, they had a huge blue plastic tarp stretched out. It was just thin plastic, but it ran along the shore and 50 feet up, and it went for a distance. I could not figure out what was going on, so I watched more. When the boat towed the skier, the photographer waited until the skier was lined up with the blue background. Sure, the background was a bit out of focus, and that was intended. But, it gave the photographer a slightly bright, slightly predictable background. It changed the exposure game somewhat.

The trick, of course, would be to find a sheet of plastic that was 50 feet wide by 300 feet long. Nobody said the job was easy.

---Bob Gross---

[dsze]

haha....Yeah, I can hear the conservation officer now. That would give a nice consistent background though. I may try to get to the Triple Crown wakeboarding this year and see if I can shoot there. They may have something like that too.

-daniel