Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 26

Thread: Weird question regarding camera getting it very wrong

  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Planet Earth
    Posts
    2,899
    I agree with Kayaker, the sky was the majority of the picture. It appears the sun was behind the clouds.

    If you use LR you could raise the shadows a bit and see how it looks.

  2. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    205
    I've raised the exposure on LR and then used a grad ND on the sky and it looks good, but I guess i'm just wanting to learn what I've done wrong so I can get it right in camera first

  3. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Planet Earth
    Posts
    2,899
    Grand ND on camera for the example photo?

    I think you have the right answer to get it right at the camera.

  4. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    205
    Whoops, sorry, the grad ND I used to get a better shot was the grad in LR. I've bought a set of Cokin grads but to be honest not really fond of the quality. But, at 1/5th the price of the Lees I can't complain (too loudly)

  5. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Big Mouse Florida
    Posts
    1,035
    So now begins the lessons in ETTR. Exposure to the right - in a set shot like this - take a moment, once you are practiced that moment will be about .5 seconds. .

    Pick AV/TV and an ISO - you will be adjusting one against the other two.

    The sky is what overwhelmed the AE. For landscapes, I am a fan of spot metering and spot metering only. I meter the most crucial element of the pic, double check the highlights ( brightest sky in this case). Set the exposure for just barely below the clipping point (this you have to double check your gear on). With the over exposure blinkies on, take a pick, there should be the very smallest portion dot of a blinky -- come down 1/3rd a stop from this. There are couple of ways to do this. Some version of manual - or some version of exposure compensation - with practice you will be able to see the difference between what you are metering and the clipping points in the scene. You can use ISO as your variable or I typically use shutter speed. I set a low ISO and then the aperture I want for the effect and fiddle w/ shutter speed 1st and then ISO second in the games of compromises.

    What this exposure does is maximize the information to the sensor. It most likely ends up with something that looks overexposed, it is much easier to pull down the exposure in post than pull it up - there simply isn't any information in the shadows. Remember we set the scene with minimal if none blown highlights.

    If the scene can't be overexposed using this method it is time for an HDR effort or know that you will have blown/clipped highlights.

    Again, with a bit of practice - just sit somewhere on a morning you are lounging and take 10 minutes to play with this and compare the settings and highlights of the same scene - it doesn't take hours and hours, just a few moments of attention to the topic and it will become 2nd nature.
    If you see me with a wrench, call 911

  6. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Planet Earth
    Posts
    2,899
    He could also buy a Lee Filter Holder and a nice set of Singh-Ray Graduated ND's and get rid of the cokin's.

    FWIW unless I am trying to take a particular picture of a particular subject I use the Singh-Ray's, but most of the time I do my own version of what Busted described. In Squidy's particular case I like the building it is very interesting, I probably would have set up the filters on the camera.
    Last edited by HDNitehawk; 02-22-2016 at 01:39 PM.

  7. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Central Kentucky
    Posts
    2,982
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Throgmartin View Post
    That's a really tough scene. This one might beg for HDR - the shot you have here exposed for the sky and another with the house/ground exposed properly.

    As is, for this image to work out it would appear to require a significant brightening of the house/ground.

    Dave
    Agreed......many times there is too much dynamic range in a scene to capture it with one exposure....HDR or a variant of it is he most obvious answer. Sometimes you can get by with just one exposure for the foreground and one for the sky and just blend them in photoshop without doing complete HDR tone mapping.

  8. #18
    Senior Member conropl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    West Michigan
    Posts
    1,458
    Looks to me to be "Spot" metered. On the 6D I believe spot metering is only on the center point. If you focused with the center point (like was discussed in a previous thread), and then recomposed, that would put the center point right in the clouds... and the clouds look perfectly exposed. If it was evaluative metering, then I think it would have been marginally better. But that is all speculation at this point, you can easily confirm with the EXIF data.

    As others have said, you took the time to set up for the picture... so you should have put the GND filter on. I understand the comment about low quality of Cokin, but they also work and will cause less noise or distortion that you are going to get pulling the building out of the shadows in post processing. Or if you expose the building properly, you are going to lose the nice character the clouds bring to the shot. I had Cokin for many years before I got a Lee holder... and I did that to get to a 4"x6" system for wider shots. I produced many good shots with Cokin and my 7D, and I have no regrets. Cokin may not be the best, but if it is what you can afford, then it is a far better choice than trying to produce the same effect in post processing and the associated noise that comes with it. The 6D is much better than older cameras, and as cameras get better I may change my opinion on the use of GND vs PP; but that is not the case at this time (IMO).

    One caveat to what I said above. If you are trying to shot 24mm or less on a FF camera, then the standard Cokin will not work - you need the wider version. Not sure which one you have.

    Pat
    5DS R, 1D X, 7D, Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6, 24mm f/1.4L II, 16-35mm f/4L IS, 24-105mm f/4L, 50mm f/1.8, 100mm Macro f/2.8L, 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II, 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L, 580EX-II
    flickr

  9. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South West Ontario
    Posts
    466
    With an image like that it is a tough call whether to use a filter which will partly cover the house if kept horizontal, only cover part of the sky if used on an angle, or take two exposures to blend in post. Even with a brighter exposure those shadows would be wanting to be brightened up to suit most people's tastes I expect unless you were willing to blow out the highlights in the sky which would lose a lot of the drama there from a dark'n'stormy day.
    At the end of the day it would probably be the most flexible to choose to blend two images. Far easier to get the exposures where you want them for each part this way. Provided of course that you have the software to do so and a desire to work this way.
    One other menu item that can affect exposures is highlight tone priority. It can shift exposure values to protect the highlights in most of the operating modes. May be worth checking to see if it is on in your camera as it would cause a similar result to what you experienced.

  10. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Planet Earth
    Posts
    2,899
    There is one option getting overlooked.

    The old old school method. It is time.
    Waiting for that right moment where the sky and the house are within a few stops of each other.
    Ideally in this instance it might be the house front lit and the sky in the background maybe 1 stop less.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •