where there’s smoke there’s forum fire
I am often disappointed with the exposure I have when I am shooting under a bright sun. I always check the LCD view screen to adjust the exposure compensation while I shoot, but under the sun the screen obviously does not show the true contrast. I am curious to know if anyone has any tricks they use - either to get the right level of exposure, or to feel confident of what you view on the screen while you are under the sun.
I shoot with my D200.
Read up on how to use the historgram. NEVER use the camera's LCD screen to set exposure. Even the best screens aren't going to give you accurate results.
I spot meter on my main subject and let the photo become what it will.
As mentioned by super shooter, learn to use the histogram, to check exposure.
The other possibility is, you are using Aperture priority and the camera cannot select a high enough shutter speed
If you do want to check the screen, use an old fashioned black cloth or a video finder
(something like a Z finder) I have not used the latter, there are a lot about, so try before you buy or start a new thread for advice
"I am often disappointed with the exposure I have when I am shooting under a bright sun"
Hi ColorsAreDrab I think what you're saying is that under contrasty conditions your camera is being fooled into images that are either too dark or too light ?
There are a few ways round this, some more complex than others so here's what I suggest...
Bracket, that means take one image at the exposure the camera says then take two more, one +1 exposure and one -1 exposure (you can do this by using the exposure compensation button on you camera, or if you're shooting in manual adjust the aperture or shutter speed up or down) You could take five shots so you could have +1, +0.5, normal, -0.5 and -1, or more if you wanted. Some photographers like to adjust by half stops others thirds...I prefer half?
Personally I don't use the histogram, I come from a film background and I've got a good understanding of exposure and light...nothing against those who use the histogram but it's not the way I work.
One of the things I'd say to any photographer who hasn't tried it is use a grey card for exposure, I'm not going to post here how to use one but if you google "using a grey card for exposure" there are many sites with tutorials.
One trick I learnt as an assistant was to use the back of your hand as a grey card reference point...so in stable lighting conditions take a reading using a grey card (or an ambient reading with a light meter). Take a reading from the back of your hand in the same light and now you'll have a difference you can remember...so if you know your hand is -1 you can always meter your hand on a shoot and adjust your camera to suit.
I hope that helps without being to technical?
If you can't see what you're shooting because the sun washes out your LCD, I hear using a Hoodman Loupe helps a lot. I don't own one and nor do I shoot enough to require one though.
It's like this little funnel thingy that you pop over your screen when you need it and it blocks out all the sun so you can see your LCD very clearly.
Hi,
In the days of film, one would expose for highlights and develop for shadows. There isn't much difference now. It just how it's how the 'development' is done.
Development for those shadows is done (for me) in Adobe Camera Raw where you can use a slew of tools to pull colors up add sharpness or even go to B&W, if that's your wish. You can add a gradient do spot touch up, any number of refinements before you even open the image.
A very good read on RAW is _Photoshop CS5 Essential Skills_ Mark Galer and Philip Andrews, Chapter 4, RAW processing.
My best,
Mike
Im really more of a shoot with the histogram sorta guy. It never hurts to check. I came from film myself but the histogram has saved a few shots I would have overexposed. We all have those days right? The advice of exposure bracketing is good also. I agree with broxibear about the half stops. This works better if your subject is not going to move though.
Histogram, bracketing, gray card, "Hoodman Loupe" and Spot metering. I use bracketing extensively while I shoot, and was wondering if there was a more 'efficient' (so to speak) way of getting the right exposure. Also, spot metering leaves the background a little too 'washed out' for my taste - and I have realized that I'd rather under-expose the picture and work on it in post-processing.
The Hoodman Loupe is actually something I thought might be out there but it is way over my budget for dealing with this problem, and also looks clumsy (*Link Removed*). Plus, I realize it's about time I spent more time with the Histogram, and also look up the gray card method!
Thanks for all your responses!!
I was going to suggest a light meter but if the budget won't cover a loupe then the meter is out ?
ColorsAreDrab said:
Histogram, bracketing, gray card, "Hoodman Loupe" and Spot metering. I use bracketing extensively while I shoot, and was wondering if there was a more 'efficient' (so to speak) way of getting the right exposure. Also, spot metering leaves the background a little too 'washed out' for my taste - and I have realized that I'd rather under-expose the picture and work on it in post-processing.The Hoodman Loupe is actually something I thought might be out there but it is way over my budget for dealing with this problem, and also looks clumsy (*Link Removed*). Plus, I realize it's about time I spent more time with the Histogram, and also look up the gray card method!
Thanks for all your responses!!
Don't worry, it's not in my budget either. I just use my hand. It's a lot cheaper, if indeed it truly is your problem.
You were a bit vague in your original post.
NSXType-R said:
Don't worry, it's not in my budget either. I just use my hand. It's a lot cheaper, if indeed it truly is your problem.You were a bit vague in your original post.
Sorry, I guess I could have been more descriptive about what I had already tried... but I did not want to lead the conversation in any one direction.
Also, the Loupe was something I was looking for (that prompted this post in the first place) but could not find... and then, when you posted the name of the product I was able to look it up - and realize that it was out of my range for a cost-effective solution!
I use the review screen on my camera only as a guide for exposure and look for "blinkies". I tend to bracket and check the histogram for unwanted cut off peaks or values falling off to the right or left of the image. It may give me 3, 4, 10 shots of the same thing but I can always delete the photos when I get home. When in doubt, I throw the camera to Raw,P,Matrix metering and auto AF and have always gotten an image I can deal with in PS.
I found relying on a 3" barely calibrated screen that has less than a 1/4 of the resolution of my photo is haphazard at best.
My "highlights" / blinkies are always on . They are quite accurate and it has proved to be a reliable method of getting correct exposures consistently . As someone shooting landscapes 99% of the time , the maximum exposure without blowing the tiniest of highlights seem to be giving me the perfect exposures I need . With dynamic range being so limited , I always seem to be needing all the light I can get for blacks . So the most light I can get without blowing highlights gives me the results I want - most of the time .
Blinkies are one of the best inventions of all time. I love my histogram but nothing double checks stupid like a blinking light. Kind of a hey are you sure you wanted to do this.
"Also, spot metering leaves the background a little too 'washed out' for my taste - and I have realized that I'd rather under-expose the picture and work on it in post-processing."
Sounds like you need to use HDR techniques.
You must log in to post.
