High Contrast Photos

[dwservingHim]

Help. High Contrast shots are the most challenging thing I've faced in photography. I don't have a graduated ND filter, but I do have a normal ND filter. How do I get the best lighting so I don't have half the picture too dark or half too exposed. I have two examples of what I mean, but one came out a little better than the other. Thanks.

[OsmosisStudios]

Originally Posted by dwservingHim

How do I get the best lighting so I don't have half the picture too dark or half too exposed.

Well, in those situations, you can't. In the first case, you've got a very dark foreground and a very bright background. In the second, you've got it, though even more obvious.

The first one is totally unchangeable. You'd have to shoot two frames at different exposures and mix and match.

The second would work if you had a graduated ND filter. It would block the sky/mountains and tone them down enough to get them within range of the ground.

You can also try HDR, but that often wont look as realistic.

[PhotographyNut]

I agree with Osmosis although I'm nowhere near an expert

You might have to take a couple shots, exposing for the elements you want separately and then blending them together in an editor. If you have a fill light option in your editor, you might also be able to pull in some detail of the darkened areas.

[dwservingHim]

One thing I don't understand about graduated ND filters though, is because half the filter is darker, wouldn't there be a dark half of the photo. Like the dark mountain in front would be even darker than the base of it.

[PhotographyNut]

The graduated ND filters have a gradual transition so if you have high contrast halves, the effect should be pretty seamless. It would have been helpful for your second photo since they are about split, but not for the first since the dark area is more in the middle.

[navcom]

Overcoming dynamic range limitations is probably the most frustrating and asked-about problem in landscape photography.

I prefer to use ND grads whenever possible versus post-processing as I've always thought it best to modify the existing light versus modifying pixels later, which can cause a loss of image quality (even if only slightly). But in the case of mountains or compositions where there is no definite horizon, grads are a bit harder to get right. In this case I would opt for bracketing several shots and then using HDR software options as Osmosis says. He is also right in that it can be easy to overdo HDR and make it look unrealistic (and worse than just living with the range limitations of your camera). HDR techniques can produce some stunning art, but in the case of traditional landscape photography, it is best to use them for what they were designed for...increasing the dynamic range just enough to overcome the limitations of the camera.

Outside of these two options, the only other thing you as a photographer can control is the time of day you shoot. Early or late in the day will produce less harsh, more pleasing light. Most landscapes are shot during these times. Mid-day sun is very harsh and makes images appear flat. But early or late will not necessarily eliminate your dynamic range issues...just make the contrasts more pleasing in most cases.

Hope that helps!

[dwservingHim]

Ok. Thanks for the good tips.