To Bracket or not to Bracket

[MDJAK]

I just started playing with bracketing on m 1DSMII.

When do you use bracketing?

Do you bracket shutter speed for best effect?

Aperture?

Do you ever bracket ISO?

How many stops do you bracket? I find if I bracket a full stop in each direction, I usually wind up with one picture that's too dark, one that's good and one too light, and usually in 2-1-3 shooting order.

Thanks
mark

[lmelendez]

I just started playing with bracketing on m 1DSMII.

When do you use bracketing?

Do you bracket shutter speed for best effect?

Aperture?

Do you ever bracket ISO?

How many stops do you bracket? I find if I bracket a full stop in each direction, I usually wind up with one picture that's too dark, one that's good and one too light, and usually in 2-1-3 shooting order.

Thanks
mark

heheheehe...
I was getting ready to respond based on my 20D... when I just realized how much things you can bracket in your 1DsMII. That's COOL.....

(sorry it is off topic though...)

[rdenney]

When do you use bracketing?

I see that feature on my 10D, but frankly I don't see the need for it. If the subject is static, then I can look at the histogram and know whether I got the exposure in an acceptable range. If the subject is moving too fast to allow time to view the histogram, then it's moving to fast to allow the time lag between the bracketed exposures. When movement is involved, anticipating the one crucial moment is everything, as I've demonstrated by missing too many shots. I'd rather take a test shot, check my exposure, and then set it all up again.

Plus, if you shoot in RAW, you have a remarkable amount of adjustment room in terms of exposure when you make the conversion.

Rick "who might bracket with film, but never using auto-bracketing" Denney

[MDJAK]

Why do you feel there is not enough time to bracket for a fast moving subject? With continuous shooting, it brackets as fast as the FPS count of the camera.

[rdenney]

Why do you feel there is not enough time to bracket for a fast moving subject? With continuous shooting, it brackets as fast as the FPS count of the camera.

But that isn't fast enough. I've tried depending on the motor drive instead of timing and anticipation, and invariably miss the crucial moment. I had a 5 fps motor for my F-1, and all it added to my ability was a much bigger film bill. I sold it and bought the winder, which really did what I wanted (wind the film without taking my eye off the finder) and wasn't so darn heavy. I know the EOS 1's are faster than that.

Bracketing is different than using a motor to get the moment, and it's even worse. With bracketing, you are bracketing because you expect there to be one exposure that will work while those right around it won't. So, in the three exposures of a bracketing sequence, you only expect one that will work. Which one will it be? The one that came right at the crucial moment, the one right before it, or the one right after it? The probability of the right exposure being the one at the crucial moment is not high, even if your timing is good. The motor might give you three chances to nail the moment, but auto-bracket is either not needed or only one of those chances will be usable.

To answer your first question, though, the choice of bracketing by adjusting the aperutre, shutter speed, or even ISO depends on which of those is more important in any given situation. If my depth of field is critical, I don't want to vary the aperture. If I'm at the limit of what I can handhold, I won't want to vary shutter speed. If my ISO is already at the limit of acceptable noise, then I won't want to vary it. Assuming that choice is settable (I haven't looked into it), it seems to me a lot of button pressing, when I can just make a test exposure, look at the histogram, and know whether I got the exposure right.

This is my opinion only, of course. But I want to explain myself so that if you disagree, you'll know why.

Rick "who thinks bracketing is a throw-back to when images were latent" Denney

[gasrocks]

I tell all my students (even in the begining classes) that "ideally" you should know the correct settings and if you bracket, you just wasted some shots/energy/time - and are feeling stupid at that point. Take an advanced class (or just get to the point where you DO know the correct settings.) I find you are much more creative and excited about taking pix when you know you are smarter than your camera, and you know you got the shot! Ok, may take you a while to get there - but have that as your goal. No bracketing. If White Balance is a problem (tricky/mixed lighting) shoot RAW + jpeg.

[cactusclay]

1/3 stop exposure.

[blundar]

The only time that I bracket is whenever I am doing a special shot of a landscape or cityscape or vacation photo where the lighting is going to be difficult. For instance, a sunset shot at a beach where I am on vacation. Or if I am trying to do a silluette shot of someone against a beautiful sky.

The other reason to bracket is if you are doing an important assignment shot at some location where you will not have a chance to return easily to.

[cactusclay]

Sounds like there is so many things you can do on those camera's, that you could spend your whole day sitting around thinking about which settings.

[Todd Jacobsen]

I just started playing with bracketing on m 1DSMII.

When do you use bracketing?

Do you bracket shutter speed for best effect?

Aperture?

Do you ever bracket ISO?

How many stops do you bracket? I find if I bracket a full stop in each direction, I usually wind up with one picture that's too dark, one that's good and one too light, and usually in 2-1-3 shooting order.

Thanks
mark

Bracketting works well for high contrast subjects where a composite is the best way to capture the moment.

Examples:
1) Setting sun behind a subject
2) Bright sky w subject
3) Snow capped mountians
4) Snow anything
5) Water reflections
6) Landscape w/ foreground shade

Amount of bracketting depends on the contrast.

[GenEOS]

Shoot RAW.

[MDJAK]

I thank everyone for their input. Rdenney, you've made your point very well. I don't disagree at all. I've learned quite a bit from all of the above.

Geneos, I do shoot raw.

Thanks
Mark

[rbbblues]

bracketing is only a win-win situation........the cost of the film you use is 'non-existant'....so why not........raw is a must...but when visualizing an image in three different exposures, you may see one that unexpectantly works best for you.......proceed from there.........nothing to loose.........

[allanc]

About the only time I do bracketing is when doing cave photography. I like to use flashbulbs and while you can calculate f-stops from guide numbers, you don't really know how it will look until you light it up. The same applies when I do multiple flash shots using strobes, too. The nice thing about digital is that there is no film cost. Bulbs on the other hand are in limited quantities and getting expensive.

[robertwgross]

When I shoot normal subjects with normal lighting conditions, then I do not bother to bracket. The single exposure will be close enough that I can "pull it in" at the RAW conversion stage.

Now, as I start to get into abnormal subjects (like white dress and black tuxedo), it gets more complicated. Normally, I do a test shot series with bracketing. Once I see the histograms, then I can see how I am doing. I might try one bracket with 2/3 stop up and down. If that looks good, then I might try another bracket of 1/3 stop up and down. Then I get on with business and turn brackets off.

As I get into a really difficult subject, like a setting sun landscape, the exposure can be way off due to the precision or imprecision of the metering point. There, I would likely bracket 2/3 stop up and down.

Now, you can bracket with shutter or you can bracket with aperture. That depends on what you are trying to do. If you have a fast-moving auto to shoot, then you may or may not want to fool with the right motion blur, so swinging the shutter speed may not get what you want. On the other hand, swinging the aperture will cause your depth of field to change narrow and wide. That may not be what you want either.

There is no perfect single solution.

---Bob Gross---

[chris.bailey]

In the studio I will tend to bracket test exposures probably by a full stop as I reckon on having at least a full stop to play with in the RAW conversion. What I am looking for more is blown highlights on facial features.

[blue_max]

It could be useful to control contrast or focus, ie if you take all three into photoshop and use them as layers to bring back detail where there wasn't any.

Not worth bothering with for family snaps, but if you need to get the picture of a lifetime, I wouln't hesitate. I don't think that makes me an amateur (though I am), but perhaps a perfectionist. I have, of course, never had to shoot the shot of a lifetime, so am talking theoretically.

One less thing to worry about if you were shooting weddings, as I am sure that is more than stressful enough already. How professional would you look with blown out faces.

It's there if you need it or need the security.

Graham