Trying to understand Contrast and Effect

[PhotoSportsOnline]

OK correct me if I am wrong,

Contrast from the Cameras perspective is the line between two subjects. So for example, as I understand it, you have a photo of a flower in front of a grassy background.

The contrast is the point of transition or should say the color change / line between the Flower and the Background is this correct?

** Note this will lead to more question on understanding contrast

[PhotoSportsOnline]

HUmmm

[JoYork]

Contrast is just another word for "difference between things". The more contrast, the more different they are. If you have 2 similar looking grey colours side by side then you'd say there wasn't much contrast there, but if you have a deep black and a bright white side by side you'd say there was a high contrast.

It doesn't just apply to brightness, it can also apply to colours too. Colours that are dissimilar to each other are contrasting colours.

[PhotoSportsOnline]

Thanks for your reply

So then as for the flower a Bright Red Rose with a Deep Green Grass Back drop the contrast is the point of change (aka the line of difference between Red and Green)

Is this correct?

If your then shooting and your back drop of the shot is overwhelming to the Focused subject, how do you correct this to stop say the sky from bleaching (My Word )the subject.

case in point this photo, you can see how the differences are in color or shades was this caused by differing contrast, too close of a shot.

As you can see on the car, the sides are a deeper color as the top and the rear (This was a Baby Blue Car)of the car. So maybe I am not correct as this being contrast, but iot seems to me the camera is picking up different shades, when the real eye sees the same color.
298983

[JoYork]

This sounds like it's a question on exposure rather than contrast.

The short answer is your camera works differently to how your eye sees the scene. The camera has a certain amount of dynamic range which needs to cover the entire photograph, so if your sky is too bright and you're exposing for the ground then the sky will become blown out (or bleached, if you prefer).

Similarly if you're exposing for the sky then the ground may become very dark.

The reason for this is when you look with your eyes they are darting around everywhere and your brain constructs the image, whereas a camera produces the scene more accurately, only not quite how you saw it at the time.

You can overcome this limitation, to some extent, by shooting in RAW mode and creating a pseudo-HDR image, or bracketing your photograph.

If you do it right then you'll end up with an image closer to what you saw at the time with your eyes, at the expense of the image now being slightly fake looking.

[PhotoSportsOnline]

Ok, I can buy exposure, maybe I am not explaining very well, or translating what my brain is trying to say :lol:

So lets use the Arm in this picture, we have natural skin against a far darker back ground. This is Contrast correct?

if it is correct, then my question is how to more define the that Contrast in the darker side without loosing the sharpness of the arm? or maybe how to correct that drastic shift for detail? Like the folks in the background sitting the detail under the canopy?

I do not like the way Lighting shadows (post Processing) has on the effect overall, so I am curious is it is technique or understand Contrast. I can see how shooting RAW would give me more control
Does that help with my question on understanding?

[jra]

What exactly is it that you are trying to achieve? Are you wanting to better isolate your subject? Maybe if you ask a detailed precise question. As for contrast, click here>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contrast

[quote]if it is correct, then my question is how to more define the that Contrast in the darker side without loosing the sharpness of the arm?[\quote]

I'm not sure I understand this question. Please explain.

[PhotoSportsOnline]

Well I appreciate the reply (I think) thanks to the internet, cordiality and the presupposition and presentation of words are lost so I wont take it as a hey dummy what you want reply. Since I did clearly say It would lead to more questions, a smart person would understand I am confused in its meaning :)

I appreciate the link, it explains contrast to a T, My question is relative to the Cameras eye though and in its settings such as contrast vs sharpness

My question in regards to the distinction and difference between the arm and behind is dark loosing back ground detail (Note folks in Chairs)

This was an obvious bright sunny day, the shadow behind the arm in the photo is not the shadow my eye saw, nor was it the shadow under the canopy or the people.

I understand exposure somewhat may be an issue here. My question is How to compensate the contrast with out loosing detail? meaning bring out the shadow area. I find post processing washes out the photo and looses detail making the shot look less detailed or IMO washed, if you look at the now differnces in the engine headers as an example

Here is the example of the same photo with 50% shadow removed
299138

Original
299139

[airfrogusmc]

Your eye sees an almost infinite range of tones where your camera and in the case of digital has a limited range. When you look at say an Ansel Adams print he learned to manipulate his large format B&W film by changing development times and dilutions and also printing techniques to expand the dynamic range of his photographs. More detail in shadows and highlights.

Digital is kind of like transparency film in which it has a very narrow tonal range (shadow to highlight). So when you have someone thats in bright sunlight and folks in the shadows you are probably not going to be able to keep all the desired detail in both if your only using one exposure. The range is to great for the sensor. But not your eye. So you can either make several exposures and blend them or make a decision of what is more important and expose for that.

[PhotoSportsOnline]

Thank you, so for the example of the original photo, it will be matter of exposure based on what I would like to see. Exposure is based on many things, ISO, Fstop, Shutter including settings of sharpness contrast and color / saturation & tone. My desired effect factually will be experience, desired effect and technique?

Is this correct?
Your eye sees an almost infinite range of tones where your camera and in the case of digital has a limited range. When you look at say an Ansel Adams print he learned to manipulate his large format B&W film by changing development times and dilutions and also printing techniques to expand the dynamic range of his photographs. More detail in shadows and highlights.

Digital is kind of like transparency film in which it has a very narrow tonal range (shadow to highlight). So when you have someone thats in bright sunlight and folks in the shadows you are probably not going to be able to keep all the desired detail in both if your only using one exposure. The range is to great for the sensor. But not your eye. So you can either make several exposures and blend them or make a decision of what is more important and expose for that.

[airfrogusmc]

I would suggest you start shooting raw if your not already and learn how to really use photoshop.

Contrast in an image can also fool the viewer like nothing looks more white than when its against black. Red never look more red than when its against its complimentary color green.

But there are going to be situations that you are going to have to make a conscience decision on whats more important shadow or highlight because your not going to be able to get both because of the limitations of the medium.

[PhotoSportsOnline]

Thanks, shooting raw is out of the question for most of my shoots. It takes a long time to process (Prep Sports) so I have to get them on the site quickly. For shots like the Historic yes I can shoot in raw.

Thanks for the info I believe I understand a tad more, thanks

[poloman]

If you are in a hurry, perfection is going to be out of the question. For most of us, just being human plus the limitations of the medium insures this.
You could probably get results that will please you more if you, as already mentioned, shoot RAW. In addition, you may want to spend some time learning how to dodge and burn well.
There is a non-destructive technique in photoshop for this. alt-click on the icon for opening a new layer in the layers pallette. When the dialog box comes up, change the mode to overlay and check the box that says fill with 50% neutral gray. Now, when you have this layer selected, you can paint with a black or a white brush to darken or lighten parts of your image. Make sure you have the opacity of the brush set to around 8% or so. If you have CS3, you can also selectively apply contrast to areas of your image by using the layer mask that is included when you use the layers pallet menu to open a new fill or adjustment layer. (circular icon with black and white) Using these tools you have complete control of your image within the dynamic range therein.
All this takes time though......
If you really want to increase the dynamic range, try using HDR. This will work best with stationary subjects. Take three exposures from a tripod and combine them with software to get a result. You will want to bracket the exposures from 1 to 2 stops. I have had good fortune with 1 3/4 stops.
For the record....I also found your question extremely difficult to understand.

[PhotoSportsOnline]

Thank you for all the reply s and tips