Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Discussion Critique Corner 
Thread started 18 Oct 2005 (Tuesday) 11:24
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

dark foreground and bright background

 
cbass
Member
Avatar
109 posts
Joined Jan 2005
Location: SLC, Utah
     
Oct 18, 2005 11:24 |  #1

Hey all,
I need some critique on these photos below. I would like to know what I did wrong and how I can fix it in the future. It seems like in the first one our faces are too dark, but I like the background and in the second one where I tried to use some fill flash (but have no idea what I'm doing when it comes to flash photography), our faces look blown, and the background looks too dark.

What could I have done to do this right?

IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE
IMAGE: http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a176/cbass94/EXIF-164.gif

IMAGE: http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a176/cbass94/_MG_0168.jpg
IMAGE: http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a176/cbass94/EXIF-168.gif

These have only been converted from RAW to jpg and resized.

metal
glass
some plastic too.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Robert_Lay
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,546 posts
Joined Jul 2005
Location: Spotsylvania Co., VA
     
Oct 18, 2005 12:57 |  #2

#1 - No Flash:
Odd that you chose manual focus - that was intentional, was it not?
Consider that the lighting is harsh and the sun is almost directly overhead (must be noon in the great Southwestern US). In fact, the shadows look like the sun may actually be a bit behind you. Not a good choice, but in this case did not do any noticeable damage. Harsh shadows in the eye sockets, exactly as one would expect. Sky is featureless - probably due to slight overexposure. I know, the faces are too dark. Besides, if you were metering off of the skin tones, then you are automatically guaranteed to be one stop too dark - right? Everyone knows facial tones should be placed on Zone VI, not Zone V, right?

# 2, with flash:
Two things got better using the flash. The sky was considerably darkened, giving it some texture and interest. (That's a natural result of the exposure now being a full stop less than in #1.)
The other beneficial effect is the faces are now lighted up with no ugly shadows in the eye sockets.
I don't consider that the faces got blown but even if they did, that's not what really got blown away for sure, and that's the young lady's jacket. It's gone - goodbye!
So, easily corrected by adusting the flash output to one stop less. There's a control for that somewhere on your 20D.

For the future - if you jockey around with the primary variables (f-stop, shutter and amount of flash) by putting your camera in manual you might be able to obtain a better compromise between the exposure for the background and the fill flash. Just reducing the flash alone may have some effect on the background - I'm not sure how these cameras decide what aperture to use when in flash mode, and that's one of the drawbacks of being in a programmed mode.

In this particular shot, I think you could have benefited from more lens opening to lighten the background (realizing that the sky will probably go bald at the same time), keep the 1/250th shutter and reduce the flash. Those are all things to have done at the time. I think you would have a tough time manipulating the background in software, although it can be done. Since this is a people shot, you can forget about holding still long enough to use a bracket shot for use in a later merge. However, a bracket shot would have been useful just for purposes of having more selections to choose from at print time.


Bob
Quality of Light (external link), Photo Tool ver 2.0 (external link)
Canon Rebel XTi; EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-f/5.6 USM; EF-S 18-55 mm f/3.5-f/5.6; EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM; EF 50mm f/1.4 USM; Canon Powershot G5; Canon AE1(2); Leica R4s; Battery Grip BG-E3; Pentax Digital Spotmeter with Zone VI Mod & Calibration.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cbass
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
109 posts
Joined Jan 2005
Location: SLC, Utah
     
Oct 18, 2005 13:07 |  #3

Good information, thank you. They were both shot within 20 minutes of each other, the first was at 6:00 pm and the second about 6:22 pm.

Could you explain the last bit of your explanation of #1 for me? The part where you say "Everyone knows facial tones should be placed on Zone VI, not Zone V, right?"

Thanks!


metal
glass
some plastic too.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Robert_Lay
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,546 posts
Joined Jul 2005
Location: Spotsylvania Co., VA
     
Oct 18, 2005 13:21 |  #4

Sure - the Zone system is based upon the idea that Zone V is exactly the shade of middle gray. By going up to Zone VI we would have a lighter value of tones that is more like what people's faces are expected to look like. So, depending upon a lot of other factors that we are ignoring, the simple rule is that if you are taking your meter reading directly from facial skin tones, then you want to use an exposure correction of +1 f-stop, which has the effect of placing the facial tones on Zone VI where they belong.

Clear as mud, right? Don't feel bad. Using the Zone system is not that difficult to learn - but understanding it takes a little longer.

One thing that I should also have mentioned is that the camera's internal exposure metering system, if left alone to do its thing, will place that which it is looking at right smack on Zone V.


Bob
Quality of Light (external link), Photo Tool ver 2.0 (external link)
Canon Rebel XTi; EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-f/5.6 USM; EF-S 18-55 mm f/3.5-f/5.6; EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM; EF 50mm f/1.4 USM; Canon Powershot G5; Canon AE1(2); Leica R4s; Battery Grip BG-E3; Pentax Digital Spotmeter with Zone VI Mod & Calibration.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Radtech1
Everlasting Gobstopper
Avatar
6,455 posts
Likes: 38
Joined Jun 2003
Location: Trantor
     
Oct 18, 2005 13:57 as a reply to  @ Robert_Lay's post |  #5

I don't know what camera you are using, but you need to dig up the manual and read the section on flash exposure compensation. Without going into detail, setting the flash compensation lower will decrease the output of the flash unit. Then the subject and background will be more equally exposed, something in between the two shots you posted.

Rad


.
.

Be humble, for you are made of the earth. Be noble, for you are made of the stars.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cbass
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
109 posts
Joined Jan 2005
Location: SLC, Utah
     
Oct 18, 2005 14:03 |  #6

Good info guys, I'll do some more playing around with it here at home so that next time I'm down there I'll get it right!

FWIW, the camera is a 20d with a tamron 28-200mm lens


metal
glass
some plastic too.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cmM
Goldmember
Avatar
5,705 posts
Joined Apr 2004
Location: Chicago / San Francisco
     
Oct 18, 2005 14:11 |  #7

you just need to balance your exposures a little bit.Use AV mode (it will meter for available light) and the flash in ETTL. At that point your exposure SHOULD be balanced (foreground and background). From there on you have some latitude as far as where you want your tones, especially since you shoot RAW




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cbass
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
109 posts
Joined Jan 2005
Location: SLC, Utah
     
Oct 18, 2005 15:35 |  #8

thanks cmM, on further inspection I found that my custom function #3 (Flash Sync speen in Av mode) was set to 1/250 sec. I assume this would have something to do with why the second shot turned out so dark in the background? Am I correct to assume that? The way I understand it, is that if that were set to "Auto" then it would have set a shutter speed that would expose the shot correctly and just use the flash as fill, is that right?

Thanks for all the help!


metal
glass
some plastic too.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hollow
Senior Member
Avatar
572 posts
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Romania
     
Oct 19, 2005 01:56 |  #9

Flash sync speed refers to the maximum shutter speed possible when using flash.
For example : if you work in Tv mode and set shutter speed to 1/500 and also you want to use the flash, the shutter speed will be automatically reset to 1/250.

Like cmM said, ETTL should do the trick to have balanced exposure on main subjects and background.

For the second shot I think that you get the dark backgound due to camera metering system.
The camera (I guess) considered more the exposure of the (main) subjects and ajusted the variables ( flash power, shutter speed and aperture ) to get a correct exposure of them.


hell was full so I came back.
just a Canon A95

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PeaPicker
in the twilight zone
Avatar
1,590 posts
Joined Feb 2005
Location: East Texas USA
     
Oct 19, 2005 15:44 |  #10

Or if you have Photoshop use a Gradient Fill to darken the sky and it looks great.:)
Jon


Jon / 40D / Pics (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Hellashot
Goldmember
4,617 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Sep 2004
Location: USA
     
Oct 20, 2005 19:56 |  #11
bannedPermanent ban

Use a polarizing filter, and use a fill flash during the day. Let the camera meter for ambient light instead of your dark faces, and let the flash to the rest.


5D, Drebel, EOS-3, K1000
lenses from 12mm-500mm

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

4,766 views & 0 likes for this thread, 7 members have posted to it.
dark foreground and bright background
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Discussion Critique Corner 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is MWCarlsson
1120 guests, 177 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.