Exposures

[pasoviennese]

Hi all,

Took some photos in Sydney (The Rock) on the weekend, trying to play around with manual spot metering.

Here are two photos taken at 1 stop apart, 1/250 vs 1/500 metered on the pink building. Which one do you prefer?

Cheers

002 by jqw1987, on Flickr

001 by jqw1987, on Flickr

[Krusty79]

I'd say the 2nd one. I can see more detail in the sky, buildings and street in that one.

[Wesnile]

The second but could be brightened up a tad. You could have shot with exposure compensation +1 or so

[fotoworx]

I agree with Krusty79 & Wesnile, the second is definitely the best.


Photography Tips

[Graebob]

The first one is probably more accurate light saturation considering the location I prefer the second though, as there is more fine detail and greater contrast in the image. You could certainly "warm up" the second or compensate the exposure up slightly in post production, to create a more pleasing, sunny scene without the "washed out" look of the first image.

[ebojorq]

Did you try to do a exposure fusion between the two images? I think you would get the fine details shown in the first one, like the bricks in that wall and reflections in the cars roofs and the deepness of colour and sky detail of the second one.

You can do this with HDR software. In Photomatix there's an option called precisely "exposure fussion" that renders more natural looking results than a HDR per se.

You would something like this (the images are not well aligned, but you might get the idea).