What’s Your Preference?

jax314 · #1 (**permalink**) 05-09-2011, 02:45 AM

I took this of my daughter today. It was sunny outside, so I placed her in the shade. There was lake in the background, as well as other ground in direct sunlight. I manually exposed for her skin, knowing it would likely overexpose the background, which it did. Since I shot in RAW, I didn't think this would be too much of a problem. I was wrong.

In hind sight, I am thinking I should have manually exposed for the bright background and used fill flash for her skin......that or use reflectors but that was not an otion at the time. Any critique on what I did or what I should have done would be more than helpful!

D5000
1/160
f/4.5
ISO 200

jax314 · #2 (**permalink**) 05-09-2011, 03:08 AM

Any better? Still unacceptable?

kevingeary · #3 (**permalink**) 05-09-2011, 04:34 AM

You did the right thing by putting her in the shade. +1 However, you missed the speckles on her dress that blew out and thus are distracting. -1

Next, you need to find a darker background so the dynamic range isn't so wide (if you don't have a flash to compensate). By choosing a higher key background, you made this shot very difficult. -1

I'd like to see her somewhere else in the frame than dead center. -0.5 (surely there were other shots framed differently to choose from).

The pose and expression are cute. +1 However, the head is not in a clean spot (it's being impaled by the pond line -1 and the background itself is somewhat cluttered (a tree and buildings). -1

Your best bet was to use off-camera flash and underexpose the background. If you're a natural light photographer and don't want to bother with off-camera flash, you need to find darker backgrounds.

If I was you (not advice...I'm actually telling you what I'd do) I'd take the same model back to the same general location at the same time of day and shoot it again to fix the above mentioned things so you can see the difference.

Hope that helps.

carlyfan · #4 (**permalink**) 05-09-2011, 04:52 AM

I definitely like the first one better! I think it's a really cute shot! I don't mind the blown out background at all. I had a play with it, I hope you don't mind. I'll take it down if you want me to.

I just cropped a little, and then adjusted color and levels. With the RAW you could probably burn the bottom of her dress where it is blown out and see if you can bring it back a little. It's a really sweet photo though; I love it! Your daughter is so cute!

Lisa

Hatch1921 · #5 (**permalink**) 05-09-2011, 04:57 AM

Kevin makes some solid points.

Moving her in to a position where the dappled light is no longer causing the spots on the dress would have helped the shot.

A 5-1 reflector would have been another. Even if you had her in the shade and couldn't have positioned her to avoid the spots... a diffusion panel over the top would have helped here.

Under exposing the background by a 1/3rd or 1/2 stop would have been fine.. you just need to push light back on to her to balance the shot. A simple reflector or off camera flash would have made a big difference here. In this setting... I think you could have gotten away with just using a reflector, feathering the light back on to her.

You have the right ideas for the most part. Maybe an extra pair of hands to diffuse the overhead light and odds are you could have managed the reflector. Or... a stand with a reflector arm would be useful as well.

Off to a good start... just need to tweak a few things.

Hatch

Hatch1921-- Professional Photography, Photoshop Video Tutorials, Equipment Reviews, and much more.

jax314 · #6 (**permalink**) 05-09-2011, 01:19 PM

Great responses....thanks. On the computer I am at now, the back doesn't seem to as blown out as it did on my laptop...but, I will experiment with reflectors and pay more attention to where I place her next time.

Would I have been able to get better results manually exposing for the bright background and then using fill in flash from a mounted SB-600 flash? Would that have been good enough? I am assuming the look of a reflector is better than fill flash?

Thanks!

jax314 · #7 (**permalink**) 05-09-2011, 01:26 PM

That's another good question....when is it okay, if ever, to have a background blown out this bad??

MrJones · #8 (**permalink**) 05-09-2011, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jax314

That's another good question....when is it okay, if ever, to have a background blown out this bad??

there are rules to photography and as all rules - they can be broken!
I have some great shots with blown backgrounds and highlights which are in my favorite photos, BUT they were blown on purpose.
what I mean, you can break the rules, just be aware that you are!
this all falls into artistic taste, some will like it and some will not.. exactly like with tilted photos, selective coloring and other artistic decisions photographers make.

p.s.
it's not blown out THAT bad!

kevingeary · #9 (**permalink**) 05-09-2011, 01:37 PM

Like I said, fill flash is extremely difficult to make work. It's easy to use it to fill light back in but as far as balancing it so that it doesn't make people say, "oh, she fill flashed it"; that's hard.