Metering, exposure, etc...

I have a pretty good grasp on my photography, and for the most part, I thought I understood the whole exposure/metering thing...but I'm doing something wrong.

I was at this abandoned missile base near where I live, and was taking some pictures. The old buildings and the sky looked awesome, but no matter what I couldn't seem to get a good picture. Whenever I captured the awesome colors of the sky, the buildings were way underexposed...and whenever the buildings looked good, the sky was all blown out.
So, I'm going back to the beginning to re-learn what I thought I already knew. Unfortunately, the internet is over saturated with so many thoughts on it, I'm not sure where to start. Can anyone offer any advice or point me in the right direction?

I realize this question is probably a bit "noobish", but I figured this was the best place to ask!

There is no "magic bullet" here. The dynamic range of cameras(especially digital), just isn't wide enough to expose both the sky, and the buildings properly.

You can try and strike a "balance" between the sky and the building, but it isn't going to look nice... if you can do it.

This is where HDR, multiple exposures/exposure-blending, come in.

Have you read Understanding Exposure? It's a great book, that's written in a way that just about anyone can grasp the concepts.

Other than that.. welcome to the frustrating part of photography.


If you can take the shot early in the day, with the sun shining on the building..from behind you, you should be able to properly expose both.

tbsguy18 wrote in post #15070672
I have a pretty good grasp on my photography, and for the most part, I thought I understood the whole exposure/metering thing...but I'm doing something wrong.

I was at this abandoned missile base near where I live, and was taking some pictures. The old buildings and the sky looked awesome, but no matter what I couldn't seem to get a good picture. Whenever I captured the awesome colors of the sky, the buildings were way underexposed...and whenever the buildings looked good, the sky was all blown out.
So, I'm going back to the beginning to re-learn what I thought I already knew. Unfortunately, the internet is over saturated with so many thoughts on it, I'm not sure where to start. Can anyone offer any advice or point me in the right direction?

I realize this question is probably a bit "noobish", but I figured this was the best place to ask!

What you have here is a circumstance where the dynamic range of the scene exceeds what your camera can capture. That means there are things in the scene that are too bright and too dark to be recorded by the camera. If you adjust the scene to capture the brightness of the sky, then you lose the detail in the shadow areas. Flip that around and maintain proper exposure on the shadow area and the sky blows out. There are a couple ways you can compensate, but neither may be all that satisfactory. One approach is to use a flash to add light to the darker area to bring it closer to the brightness of the sky. Thats great for portraits, and small things, but not really going to work for a silo. The other option would be to use a tripod take 3 (or more) shots adjusting for the brights, middle, and darks, and then blending them in the camera. This is called HDR (high dynamic range) and when used properly can be amazing. A lot of people overuse it and create some comical images though.

[race to post an answer about high dynamic range]

This is an issue that goes beyond simple metering. The issue here is that in the scene you're shooting, the dynamic range is very wide - meaning, the bright parts of the image (sky) are very bright compared to the dark parts of the image (buildings). When you're looking at the scene with your naked eye, your eye and brain compensate for this, so you can see detail in both sky and buildings. But your camera is not as good as your eye-brain combination, so it's just not able to capture what you see without a little help.

There are a couple of ways around this dilemma:
1) Multiple exposures. With the camera on a tripod, take one shot with the sky exposed how you like it, and a second shot with the buildings exposed how you like it, then put them together in post-processing. (there's potentially way more to it than that, but there it is in a nutshell) Drawbacks: More work and hassle in post-processing; can look very fake if done poorly.

2) A Graduated Neutral Density (GND) filter. This is a filter that you put on the front of your lens, that blocks some light from the top of the image (sky) and is clear at the bottom (buildings). This lets you get a good exposure for both the sky and the buildings, since the filter makes the sky dimmer in relation to the buildings. Drawbacks: Good GNDs can be expensive; choosing the right GND for your application takes some expertise; if the top of the buildings poke up into the sky, the top of the buildings might be darkened too much.

3) Shoot raw and fix it in post. With a little effort and expertise in a raw processor like Lightroom, Aperture, or DPP, you can pull down the exposure of the sky and bring back the blown-out detail, and bring up the exposure in the buildings to recover some too-dark detail. Drawbacks: doesn't always work if dynamic range is extremely wide; also, raw files are big, and you HAVE to process them, you can't just use them right off the memory card.

4) Shoot during a different time of day. Go out at sunrise or sunset, when the sun is at your back and shining onto the face of the buildings. Drawbacks: Doesn't always work, depending on the location of the buildings; very limited window of time to get the right shot (sometimes only a couple of minutes); waking up and getting on location before sunrise is for the birds.

All great advice thanks! I guess its probably pretty save to assume that I understand exposure/metering correctly, but its not going to help in this situation lol. I tried going back to shoot at sunset, but yea...a very limited window of time. Especially when you get caught in traffic. I've done some HDR photos before, so I think thats what I'm going to have to do here. Thanks again!

Or a Grad filter may help you it will cut some of the light from the sky as you expose for the buildings , I have Grads but I am not an expert at using them .

David

tbsguy18 wrote in post #15070860
All great advice thanks! I guess its probably pretty save to assume that I understand exposure/metering correctly, but its not going to help in this situation lol. I tried going back to shoot at sunset, but yea...a very limited window of time. Especially when you get caught in traffic. I've done some HDR photos before, so I think thats what I'm going to have to do here. Thanks again!

Yes, always plan to arrive at least half an hour before you really need to be there (preferrably more like an hour+). I've missed my share of great photos by not accounting for traffic, lack of parking, etc.

HDR is a great option, but for situations like this, you can also get away with simple exposure blending in Photoshop (or Elements or most any other editing program). Just take an exposure for the buildings, a second for the sky and drop the sky from the second exposure onto the first photo. It takes a little work to keep it looking natural. If you have Lightroom 4 or Photoshop CS6, the new Highlight and Shadow sliders are pretty amazing, and if you shoot in RAW somewhere in the middle of blowing out your highlights and underexposing your shadows, it's amazing what you can recover in post.

IslandCrow wrote in post #15079375
Yes, always plan to arrive at least half an hour before you really need to be there (preferrably more like an hour+). I've missed my share of great photos by not accounting for traffic, lack of parking, etc.

HDR is a great option, but for situations like this, you can also get away with simple exposure blending in Photoshop (or Elements or most any other editing program). Just take an exposure for the buildings, a second for the sky and drop the sky from the second exposure onto the first photo. It takes a little work to keep it looking natural. If you have Lightroom 4 or Photoshop CS6, the new Highlight and Shadow sliders are pretty amazing, and if you shoot in RAW somewhere in the middle of blowing out your highlights and underexposing your shadows, it's amazing what you can recover in post.

I actually just got CS6 so I'm going to try that tonight.
As far as getting a decent photo of the sky and its colors, what do you suggest? What would be the best shutter speed, aperture, etc... to keep my blue sky looking blue.

tbsguy18 wrote in post #15080613
I actually just got CS6 so I'm going to try that tonight.
As far as getting a decent photo of the sky and its colors, what do you suggest? What would be the best shutter speed, aperture, etc... to keep my blue sky looking blue.

just meter for the sky, if you have photoshop shoot in RAW and correct (increase) exposure in the foreground with PS layers

With skies, a polarizing filter is sometimes your best bet to making it darker.

watt100 wrote in post #15083742
just meter for the sky, if you have photoshop shoot in RAW and correct (increase) exposure in the foreground with PS layers

With the latest version of ACR in CS6 you want to do the exact opposite in RAW and expose for the foreground and bring the sky DOWN in post. As long as the sky is not more than two stops brighter you will be fine, you may even make it to 2.5 stops. If the difference is more than the 2 stops then go with two stops under the sky. If you can set things up so that with all the processing sorted, you have not raised the level of any part of the image from where it was with no processing added, you will not introduce any noise.

If you brighten any part of an image from the start level then you will very quickly start to introduce noise even at ISO 100. It is fine to reduce a brightness with say the exposure slider and then bring parts back up with say the shadows slider. As long as those parts don't end up brighter than they started.

Alan