Question regarding landscape exposures

[spaceman]

I've been having a tough time getting really good exposures when I want to shoot a landscape scene with lighting at both ends of the spectrum. If I meter off the sky, my foreground can be too dark, and metering off my foreground blows out my sky. Is there anything else I can try? I've pretty much resigned to the fact that I need to purchase a graduated ND filter for my 17-40L, but I thought I would check here for any other possible solutions first. Thanks

Alan

[aam1234]

I'm not an expert by any means, but what I'm planning to do for that situation is get a CP (circular polarizer - spelling?). Heard it helps for the problem you are having.

[Mark Kemp]

Assuming you are shooting digital or scanning film(this is a digital forum) you can take two images, one exposed for the ground and one for the sky. use a tripod so that they are otherwise identical. Then you can use you favourite imgae editor to blend the two and make a perfect exposure.

[lucasdigital]

Mark's right, the secret is not to depend on one exposure, but to use some basic post process work to blend two or more shots together.

There is a way to use a single shot to fudge this method, its not perfect, but can rescue shots that otherwise would be discarded.

Rather than try and explain I threw together a visual to show what you do.

http://www.lucas-digital.com/bloghouse/rescue.jpg

[Steven M. Anthony]

Lucas:

Are the "up" and "down" layer photos 2 versions of the "original?" Or 2 new photos--one exposed for sky, one exposed for ground?

[tofuboy]

My understanding is lucasdigital used just one image, and adjusted it to create the two used for blending. This works great if you aren't able to take 2 identical shots. If you are able to take 2 identical shots, that would be ideal due to the nature of digital capture (images exposed brighter have more data than those underexposed.. read this for more info about that http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/expose-right.shtm )

If you don't want to do any post-processing, a graduated nd filter is really the only way to go. A polarizer will help a little bit I think.

[lucasdigital]

Lucas:

Are the "up" and "down" layer photos 2 versions of the "original?" Or 2 new photos--one exposed for sky, one exposed for ground?

Hi,

Tofuboy is right. This solution uses just one badly exposed image. Tofuboy is also right that you can get more out of an over-exposed image, but the end results are always dependent on lots of factors.

[neil_r]

I'm not an expert by any means, but what I'm planning to do for that situation is get a CP (circular polarizer - spelling?). Heard it helps for the problem you are having.

It won’t

N

[Olegis]

Not CP - you must be talking about Neutral Density Graduated filter. Such filter is divided into two halves - one is clear and the other is darker.
Here is a nice article about graduated ND filters - http://members.aol.com/kevinoneil/nd.html

[Sam North]

Speaking from experience, it’s unlikely that you will underexpose a typical digital landscape shot, unless a bright sky plays a major role in the composition. You’re more likely to lose significant detail in the sky. The earlier or later you can shoot landscapes the better, but that might not suit.

One option, if it’s 2/3+ land in the shot, is to take two exposures, one for land, one for sky, and blend them on the computer. If you take just one shot you’ll almost certainly find your sky has lost too much detail. Digital blending is not that tricky really, but the more overall detail you can record in the field, the better. You should use a tripod with this technique.

The other option is to use a grey graduated filter just as many film photographers do, particularly with slide film: if possible set the exposure for a mid-tone and add on half a stop (digital); slide the grey grad through the holder until the sky looks much better, taking care to properly line up the graduation line, and make sure you don’t encroach too much on the land. Take the shot and check the histogram. (I try to push the exposure slightly without blowing highlights.)

Some professionals pop a grey grad on and shoot away without a tripod.

Sam

[aam1234]

A CP won't make the sky look better (darker)?

[Scottes]

A CP will make *everything* look darker.

A Graduated Neutral Density filter allows you to filter the sky but not the land, thus making the sky darker to more closely match the land.

[aam1234]

Got it, thanks.

[spaceman]

I have used circular filters in the past, but now I'm starting to take a look at the square ones. Could any of you recommend what I would need to set up a Cokin type system for my 300D? I know I need adapters, holders, etc, but I'm a little lost here. Do I need a seperate adapter for each lens size? Thanks.

Alan

[Mark Kemp]

I have used circular filters in the past, but now I'm starting to take a look at the square ones. Could any of you recommend what I would need to set up a Cokin type system for my 300D? I know I need adapters, holders, etc, but I'm a little lost here. Do I need a seperate adapter for each lens size? Thanks.

Alan

Ther are two holder sizes 'A' for small lenses and 'P' for large - I am not sure exactly what the biggest size lens that will fit an A is but its smaller than the 77mm threadthat most Canon L series have, but most standard Canon lenses should be OK.

The filters themselves obviously also come in A or P size and fit in slots in the respective holder. P of course is more expensive.

The holders are connected to the lens thread with an adaptor ring, that clips into the holder.

If you have more than 1 size lens you need an adaptor ring for each one. If you don't want the hassle of clipping the rings in and out of the holders, then you can also get more holders.

Hope this helps, but for more data see Cokins own website.

[spaceman]

Ok, I will eventually go with a rectangular filter system, but for now I will have to rely on post-processing techniques until I can figure out what I want. I have a question regarding exposure when shooting my landscape with bright highlights (sky) and darker midtones in the foreground. Is it better to bracket my exposures (yes, I am using a tripod), or should I try to meter off of the sky/foreground seperatly? Won't bracketing do the same thing as the seperate metering? Also, with bracketing, what is a good rule of thumb concerning the number of stops for over/under exposing? Thanks.

Alan

[Sam North]

Hello Spaceman

Expose separately for the sky and the land.

You can bracket for the landscape – -0.5, meter reading – +0.5, but try starting off by simply exposing for the mid-tones in the shot and then push the exposure to the point where the histogram shows more information to the right of the display, without the abrupt peaks that indicate blown highlights. The histogram is really the key here, in my experience. Doing this will maximise your exposure for the ground area and give you more to work with later on your computer.

But, if there's a lot of water or bright reflections in the shot, I've found it will really take a couple of land exposures to get it really right and good digital blending (from RAW) to make use of all the data. I'm not a big fan of RAW - as an amateur with a modest workflow, it's a bit of a fiddle in my opinion! - and rarely use it, but it will certainly help to rescue a couple of stops of highlight detail that you may not think are there.

Depending on how bright the sky is, you could try -2.0 and work up from there, although I've found even with a cloudy, bright sky the highlights can still blow somewhere! Try RAW if this is a persistent problem and do a search on RAW-editing methods, and levels and curves too. The Luminous Landscape has very good tutorials on this, dealing with sky problems and highlights elsewhere in the shot. Blending is very effective, and impressive. It's not that difficult really, but perhaps a little time consuming for some. These together will will give you the best control over difficult highlights.

So, if it's digital landscapes, shoot RAW, expose for the sky and the land separately, bracket if it helps you, get the sky the way you want it without blown data, and always keep a close eye on the histogram.

Good luck - or should I say, good DSLR technique!

Sam