How Do I Set Exposure For Something Like This?

[raindrop]

I had the aperture at f7.1, my ISO was at 400 (I didn't check doh! or would probably have dialed it back to auto ISO) and the camera set speed at 1/640th sec. I had the EV diailed down a bit at 0.03. I know the camera settings were not ideal but what will work better next time to get less blown out highlights when shooting on brightly lit white objects?

[kirbinster]

I'm not sure you could do a lot better. I check the full size and you have fairly good detail on the swan. A camera only has so much dynamic range. Flash might help to brighten up the Mallards.

[autofocus]

spot metering off the highlights on the swan probably would have worked better. You have an image here that is approximately 70% dark and 30% bright. In matrix metering the camera will look at all that, and do it's best to average it out. In this case, the water and the babies (70%) are exposed reasonably well at the expense of the swan (30%) being slightly overexposed. Maybe a ~1/2 stop underexposure shot in manual mode would have yielded better results

[archersdad]

I'm assuming that was all natural light, so set ISO to 100, Av mode at around f8, and meter off the brightest part of the image and you should be fine. Of course, your shadows will then be pretty dark so you will probably have to play with the exposure compensation a bit to nail it.

[nickbedford]

I probably would have gone with f/5.6, 1/250th at ISO 100. 1/250th to make sure the movement is still frozen solid.

1/640th ISO 400 to ISO 100 = 1/160th

f/7.1 to f/5.6 is 0.7887 stops = 1.72755 times the shutter speed

= 160 * 1.72755 = 1/270th = 1/250th setting

[faeriegodess612]

Originally Posted by nickbedford

I probably would have gone with f/5.6, 1/250th at ISO 100. 1/250th to make sure the movement is still frozen solid.

1/640th ISO 400 to ISO 100 = 1/160th

f/7.1 to f/5.6 is 0.7887 stops = 1.72755 times the shutter speed

= 160 * 1.72755 = 1/270th = 1/250th setting

Why is it that your not at some school like M.I.T.? You confuse me with your mathematical equations to the science and crap behind photography. My best thing in school was always Literature.

[ravncat]

Originally Posted by nickbedford

I probably would have gone with f/5.6, 1/250th at ISO 100. 1/250th to make sure the movement is still frozen solid.

1/640th ISO 400 to ISO 100 = 1/160th

f/7.1 to f/5.6 is 0.7887 stops = 1.72755 times the shutter speed

= 160 * 1.72755 = 1/270th = 1/250th setting

That would just give an equvalent exposure at Iso 100 at 5.6 - and wouldn`t really solve the highlight issue, granted there might be some more available dynamic range at iso 100, especially on older cameras - I think one needs to further adjust the image either in Raw, backing down the exposure and using highlight recovery - assuming that the highlights are recoverable, or, meter and expose differently, as suggested above, perhaps spot metering off of the swan and increasing the exposure to put the white highlights closer to the right end of the histogram.

Depending on the camera used - I am not sure there`d be much benefit to dropping to iso for the amount of signal available here, I would imagine that the extra shutter speed would indeed be beneficial to the original image. I`m not sure there`s a real reason to have 5.6 over 7.1 especially if it is a kit lens, as 7.1 may be performing better... I can understand wanting to decrease ISO however..

[autofocus]

Originally Posted by faeriegodess612

Why is it that your not at some school like M.I.T.? You confuse me with your mathematical equations to the science and crap behind photography. My best thing in school was always Literature.

just a matter of shifting the three main exposure functions and wind up with the same end exposure value result, but at a faster shutter speed. Like you can say 2+2=4, or 3+1=4, both give you the same result, just a different way to get there. But, it really doesn't answer the exposure question and issues of the original poster if it provides the same end results of yielding slightly blown out white details.

[autofocus]

Originally Posted by ravncat

That would just give an equvalent exposure at Iso 100 at 5.6 - and wouldn`t really solve the highlight issue, granted there might be some more available dynamic range at iso 100, especially on older cameras - I think one needs to further adjust the image either in Raw, backing down the exposure and using highlight recovery - assuming that the highlights are recoverable, or, meter and expose differently, as suggested above, perhaps spot metering off of the swan and increasing the exposure to put the white highlights closer to the right end of the histogram.

Depending on the camera used - I am not sure there`d be much benefit to dropping to iso for the amount of signal available here, I would imagine that the extra shutter speed would indeed be beneficial to the original image. I`m not sure there`s a real reason to have 5.6 over 7.1 especially if it is a kit lens, as 7.1 may be performing better... I can understand wanting to decrease ISO however..

+1..you beat me to it