Sand Stone Rock Formation

[gag24]

I was taking pictures this evening and was trying to compose this sandstone formation in the foreground with the white mesa in the background. My question: Is there a way or a setting that you can use that will help so you don't blowout the highlights? This picture is straight out of the camera.

Camera Nikon D90
Exposure: 1/40
F/10.0
ISO 500
Aperture Priority
Focal Length 32 MM
No Flash

[nathanbarlow]

I dont see any blown highlights . . . your "exposure" which is really shutter speed is very low and your iso is quite high. Not that they have caused any problems persay, but there doesnt seem to be any reason you need ISO 500, unless this was actually semi-darkness, and you have exposed to get daylight?

There is no one setting to avoid blown highlights, but they are caused by overexposeure (aka too much lihgt, via either too slow shutter speed, or really wide aperture) Generally, if you want no blown highlights, you need to expose for the brightest areas, such as sky or light sources if they are in frame.

[gag24]

Thanks Nathan, I probably mis-diagnosed the problem with the photo. The sky had a nice blue color on the evening I took this photo, why does it look so dull and light? The sun had just gone down and I was trying to keep my exposure as fast as I could while keeping a good DOF. I thought putting my ISO at 500 would help both. Should I have decreased my DOF. and lowered my ISO? Would this help my camera take the picture the way my eye saw the scene?


Flickr: gag24's Photostream

[navcom]

I think your shot is good, it's most likely the dynamic range that is not getting you what you saw with your eye. In your scene, the sky is probably much brighter than the ground and hills as the sun has already descended far enough that it only affects the sky itself.

The camera is setting the exposure based on an average of the entire scene. So it is trying to get the foreground and hills equal to the sky, which it cannot physically do. The compromise is that in order to properly expose the 2/3 of the image that is your foreground, the 1/3 that is your sky will be a bit over-exposed....not much since the highlights are not overblown...but enough to wash out the blue you see with the naked eye.

The correction? You could use HDR where you take three or more pictures exposed for the lowest and highest contrast as well as the middle and combine them together with Photoshop or other software. A second option is to use a graduated neutral density filter to "push back" the brighter sky to conform with the settings for the foreground exposure.

Another option would be to post-process this photo (or inversely one that is properly exposed for the blue sky) so that it looks good in the sky and foreground.

Hope that helps!

[gag24]

Thanks navcom, that explains everything real well. I'm sure it will mean more as I continue to learn. I am just starting to learn what "filter effect" can have on landscape photograhy. I was out today and ran into a guy that had a polorizer filter and he let me mess around with it a little. I was impressed with how it left the sky looking more blue. I here there is a warming plus polorizing filter. Can someone give me some advice on what I should be looking for for landscape?

[navcom]

Polarizers can be a life-saver when you have no choice but to shoot a landscape in the middle of the day. They can save a harsh sky and also cut down on reflections.

Years ago when I was first getting into landscape photography, I was so frustrated that I could never get the powerful images that so many of the pro's and good ametuers could come home with. I asked one of my mentors at the time what I was doing wrong. He asked if I ate left-overs for supper. I was confused and said I didn't know what that had to do with photography. He said that if I was eating fresh suppers, I was missing the perfect time to be taking landscape photos.

Just about every landscape scene (not every one, but most) will turn out much better when shot early or late in the day...usually about an hour after sunrise and an hour before sunset. This is called the "golden hour" because the light is almost a golden color and makes everything much more appealing. During this time, the shadows are also long which in turn makes everything appear more "3D" in a photograph...it adds depth to your images.

In the mid-day sun, there are no shadows, which makes everything appear very flat. The light is also very harsh, which makes high contrast situations even worse. For this reason, it is rare that you find a professional landscape photo that was not taking early or late in the day.

The dirty little secret to overcoming my harsh photo issues was not my camera or my technique...it was simply the time of day I was shooting. It was like a light bulb turned on in my head.

Some of the filters I use for landscape photography...

Graduated Neutral Density filters...I have 3 sets. One set of 1-3 stop soft transition, one set of 1-3 stop hard transition, and one set of 1-3 stop reverse grads. All are Cokin "p" style filters (rectangular). I use Singh Ray brand ND grads.

Gold and Blue Polarizer...same as a standard polarizer except that as you rotate it, it also changes from warm hues (and more golden) to cooler hues (more blue). It works especially well with water and foliage colors. This is also a Singh Ray (circular screw-on style).

Variable ND filter...this one is a sold neutral density filter (screw on type). The unique thing about it is that you can rotate it just like a circular polarizer but as you do, it will become darker or lighter depending on which way you rotate it. This works extremely well for slowing down your shutter speed to get that "blurring" effect on waterfalls or streams/rivers. You can do this with standard solid ND filters, but the ability to "dial in" to the exact shutter speed you want on the fly during daylight is awesome. Yes...this is also a Singh Ray.

I also pack a standard warming and cooling filter. The warming filter works well for sunrises/sunsets or for times when I just want to tone down the harshness of a composition (but I don't always use it). The cooling filter works well in the winter snow/ice or when I want a more "foreboding" feeling in an image...if that makes any sense.

I use the ND grads and the G&B polarizer the most.

[gag24]

Thanks again navcom, everything makes sense. I think I'll start with the G&B and work on the ND grads filter as I learn more. I really appreciate you taking time and explaining this to me. I checked out your photostream on Flickr and I can see by the wonderful photos you take that you really know what your doing. Thanks again!

[navcom]

Originally Posted by gag24

Thanks again navcom, everything makes sense. I think I'll start with the G&B and work on the ND grads filter as I learn more. I really appreciate you taking time and explaining this to me. I checked out your photostream on Flickr and I can see by the wonderful photos you take that you really know what your doing. Thanks again!

Not a problem! Really know what I'm doing? Well, I'm always learning! Love what I'm doing? You bet!

[jdepould]

Originally Posted by nathanbarlow

I dont see any blown highlights . . . your "exposure" which is really shutter speed is very low and your iso is quite high. Not that they have caused any problems persay, but there doesnt seem to be any reason you need ISO 500, unless this was actually semi-darkness, and you have exposed to get daylight?

There is no one setting to avoid blown highlights, but they are caused by overexposeure (aka too much lihgt, via either too slow shutter speed, or really wide aperture) Generally, if you want no blown highlights, you need to expose for the brightest areas, such as sky or light sources if they are in frame.

Exposure and shutter speed are two different things.

[nathanbarlow]

Originally Posted by jdepould

Exposure and shutter speed are two different things.

thats what im sayinhg. he said his exposure was 1/40 . . was telling him that his "exopsure" was realy his shutterspeed . .