Exposure Work

[Peach]

So, anyone who's read my "Should I Sell My Camera?" thread will know that I'm struggling with exposure. I do know the exposure triangle (ISO, shutter speed, aperture) but now I'm working in Aperture Priority mode on my camera and trying to get the exposure compensation right. I tried yesterday with what I thought were initially decent results but later felt were awful. Yesterday was, however, a very bright day against a lot of snow; not the best conditions.

I tried again today. The sky was overcast so there wasn't so much BRIGHT light. Unfortunately, my winter jacket is bright white so while I tried to expose for my face, my jacket blew out. Below are 2 of the better pictures (although I have others I like which, when processed will be nice, I think) SOOC and their EXIF. I should have used a smaller aperture, I know that now. The camera was in aperture priority.


Testing2 by JustPeachee, on Flickr


Testing by JustPeachee, on Flickr

Exif for both:
Exposure: 1/125
Aperture: 4.5
ISO 400
Exposure bias: +1

Now, in post, these pictures will come out pretty decentish. I'm not OMGWOW thrilled with them, but I think they're actually not that bad.

What I want to know is this:

The exposure. It's flat. How could I have made this much more ...hm..contrasty SOOC? Should I have upped the shutter speed?

Ignoring composition and subject, I would like to know what I could do differently in terms of exposure.

[kirbinster]

I think you should be shooting at a higher f/stop number (smaller opening). If I read your exif data correctly you had the lens set at 31mm and were 0.84m from the subject. If I convert that to inches and plug it into my depth of field calculator that gives you a sharp image only plus or minus roughly one inch from the focus point. Thus, if you focused on your eyes your nose would not be sharp -- I think that is something you need to work on.

[ArmySoldier777]

Good advice from Kirb on that topic. As far as contrast goes, other than maybe going down a stop in exposure to increase the shadows a bit, I think you're pretty spot on. The lens itself can actually have a little bit to do with the contrast as well. Some lenses wide open lose a little contrast, so they start looking a little more "flat". It's pretty easily fixed in PP with just a minor curves adjustment, or by increasing the blacks, depending on your individual work flow. But I can understand you wanting to get a decent contrast SOOC as well. Another thing that's probably affecting the contrast in these photos, is that the scene itself seems to be pretty evenly lit, with a lot of fill light going into the shadows. A lot of people don't think about it, but snow is one giant reflector lol. So the dark shadowed areas that would normally be there to give you that good contrast, is being filled in by all the light reflecting back up off the snow, making things look a little flatter.

[RichardTaylor]

Just looking at the histogram, you may have been able to drop the exposure a tad (1/3 stop?) to stop the highlights blowing out.

If you want more contrast straight out of camera, and you are shooting jpg or RAW+jpg, maybe a applying a "picture style" (In camera processing) may help.

The shutter speed, alone, will only make a difference in freezing camera or subject movement.

[Peach]

How many clicks of the wheel on the camera = 1 stop? Is it one click? That's what I don't get. My camera gives me numbers like 1/250, or 1/2000.. I have no idea what this means and THAT is annoying.

Also, the above images are the RAW files converted to jpeg to post to flickr. When I looked at the pictures on the camera, I'm seeing the jpeg pictures the camera displays and they looked a lot nicer. I do realize the camera does some processing to them. So ...I don't know. I'm just getting annoyed again.

Kirbinster, I know about the aperture (I mentioned that in my first post). I should have chosen probably around f5-7. I'm not concerned about that right now and that's not something I feel I need to work on because I already know how to correct that. My concern right now is with exposure; not focus.

David, I know the snow is a giant reflector; that's why I went outside lol Inside apparently (based on the other thread) doesn't have enough light and I'd be about 100x more frustrated than I am now. Yesterday there was too much variability in lighting, today it's too even. Can't win for trying.

Richard, I am shooting in RAW+jpeg. The camera shows me the jpeg on the LCD screen and it looked 10x better than the above pictures. Does that mean then that every picture needs post work? I have done some post work to the pictures I took today (none have been uploaded yet) and I'm really happy with them. But, I would like to try and get the best pictures possible SOOC so that there's very little post needed. I'm beginning to wonder if that's just impossible for me to do; because I am trying and I'm not seeing improvements. It's also very hard when you see the jpeg displayed on the LCD and figure you're going in the right direction, only to get back to the computer and realize that no - no you weren't and everything still looks like crap.

[ArmySoldier777]

Lol, atleast you are trying though. That says a lot. As far as post processing goes, yeah every Raw file needs post processing work. Sharpening, contrast, all of that. The reason the Jpegs on the camera may look better is that the camera is already applying those changes to the Jpeg, in the way that it thinks it needs to be done. The Raw files don't receive those changes, it's just the Raw data.

[Peach]

*facepalm* serious? So.. is there ever the possibility of getting a RAW file to look as close to what the LCD shows? Because if not, then I'm stressing about nothing. I'll do post on the pictures I took today, and then try some more tomorrow but using a larger aperture.

This: week 10 : winter wonderland | Flickr - Photo Sharing! is my inspiration. I love that picture. I'll try the same settings she used there tomorrow. See what happens.

[ArmySoldier777]

Lol, I get the feeling you just made a realization that changed the way you see a lot of things. I always hate that for a little while because I feel like it's something I should've gotten sooner, but I love it because things afterwards get so much easier lol.

But yep, seriously. My LCD is pretty close to my Raw, but it's not exact either. And it's at it's default settings, but even then there are some minor changes being applied to the Jpeg. So I'm not sure if you'll ever get the exact same thing when shooting Raw. That's why I just use it to make sure my exposure and composition looks decent, because atleast at default settings, the composition is right and the exposure is pretty close.

That's the reason that a lot of "purist" photographers only shoot Jpeg, which I think is kind of condescending in itself... I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that, not at all. I'd just rather make the photo what I remember it to be, rather than what the camera thinks it should be. There are a lot of people that keep their PP simple with their Raw files though. Just basic sharpening, contrast adjustments, and maybe a saturation adjustment.

[graciousness]

Play around with faster shutter speed to reduce the ambient light. I shoot with faster shutter speeds all the time, use fill flash if required. Manual mode is the key.

For example, here is a photo I took in the middle of a very bright day:



Exposure 0.004 sec (1/250)
Aperture f/4.5
Focal Length 32 mm
ISO Speed 200
Exposure Bias 0 EV
Flash On, Fired
Flash Compensation -1

This photo is pre major edit and was only converted in Aperture from Raw to Jpeg at this stage. On edit, I'd clone out that stupid blue bag on the bottom corner, etc.

This kid was in the shade and super cute without any of the 60 kids playing in that park behind him at that time so I thought it was a perfect opportunity to take the shot. This was taken before noon (12pm) so you can imagine how bright it is. You can see there are barely any clouds around.

If I had shot this at a slower shutter speed, that sky would be blown out. I wanted to show the blue sky against those pretty trees so I made a conscious decision to underexpose that sky using fast shutter speed and then using fill flash to light up that baby.

So if you imagine doing that with your environmental portrait shots, especially around bright snow, I think you will find that your photos will be more balanced exposure wise.

I know this isn't the best photo, but just wanted to show an example of where fast shutter speed would really benefit with the help of fill flash.

Have a play around and see if it's something that may work for you.

Cheers,

Grace

[Peach]

*groans* cute kid. And manual.. *sigh* I was suggested moving to Aperture priority. *twitch*. I kind of like manual better, after what I played with today.

I'll try the larger aperture, faster shutter speed, and a fill flash and see what happens Thanks Grace!

David - purist photographer is hugely condescending lol Kind of like the hipsters who think you're only cool if you ONLY have an iPhone :P I'll keep slogging through this. Logic dictates that eventually at least ONE picture will be good LOL