was it the shadow
Nov 15, 2012 20:34:44 #
I don't know why, but something about this picture is just not right... As you can see, I had everyone facing towards the sun. I didn't realize how much shade from the trees there was. Should I have had the groups back to the sun and used a flash? Or still used a flash with them facing the sun. Thanks for your input ahead of time. Original picture.
Olympus e420 setting P, iso 200, F4, 1/80, no flash
Olympus e420 setting P, iso 200, F4, 1/80, no flash
Nov 15, 2012 21:13:23 #
You could have tried the flash, but I think you would have to use more than one with a group that big. One flash would be to bright in the center and to dull on the outside areas.
Erv
Erv
Nov 15, 2012 21:18:47 #
I would do everything the opposite that you did.
the shot has Spotty light .. into the sun.. underexposed.
Reversing the perspective you would have the spotty light on you and the subjects would be in the shade.
ISO 800 aperture at f/8 would make it about right.
You might go to F/11 and up your ISO even more. 1/60 shutter would probably be your low end on handheld.
Using flash(if you could get the spread) would work. I would have used two flash one on each side. I understand that for most this is not an option on a spontaneous shot.
Just remember facing direct sun is almost never good.
Reversing the perspective you would have to watch for lens flare. Make sure the sun is high enough and that your lens is in the shade of the tree leafs.
Another alternative would be to do the shot behind the building.(if it was clear)
the shot has Spotty light .. into the sun.. underexposed.
Reversing the perspective you would have the spotty light on you and the subjects would be in the shade.
ISO 800 aperture at f/8 would make it about right.
You might go to F/11 and up your ISO even more. 1/60 shutter would probably be your low end on handheld.
Using flash(if you could get the spread) would work. I would have used two flash one on each side. I understand that for most this is not an option on a spontaneous shot.
Just remember facing direct sun is almost never good.
Reversing the perspective you would have to watch for lens flare. Make sure the sun is high enough and that your lens is in the shade of the tree leafs.
Another alternative would be to do the shot behind the building.(if it was clear)
Nov 15, 2012 21:34:36 #
PalePictures wrote:
I would do everything the opposite that you did. b... (show quote)
I will get another chance in a couple of weeks... I will try it the other way... I thought about that after the fact... I will try the different settings also... Thank you for the help and for taking the time to respond...
Nov 15, 2012 21:36:16 #
I don't think there is an easy answer to your question. Not knowing how your camera performs means I can't make any suggestions. Here is what I have found:
It is sometimes better to have your subject(s) face away from the sun as you use a fill flash. However, some cameras won't throw enough light to cover a group this size. Perhaps using a higher ISO up to say 800 might give you better results.
I've included a copy of your photo with some Photoshop adjustments that brightens up the subjects. I hope you don't mind.
It is sometimes better to have your subject(s) face away from the sun as you use a fill flash. However, some cameras won't throw enough light to cover a group this size. Perhaps using a higher ISO up to say 800 might give you better results.
I've included a copy of your photo with some Photoshop adjustments that brightens up the subjects. I hope you don't mind.
Nov 15, 2012 21:36:38 #
Erv wrote:
You could have tried the flash, but I think you would have to use more than one with a group that big. One flash would be to bright in the center and to dull on the outside areas.
Erv
Erv
You are so right... If I have to use the flash, I will for sure have them group it up a lot... like they say in the service, "make your buddy smile". thank you for your input
Nov 15, 2012 21:40:08 #
OSOBOSO wrote:
I don't think there is an easy answer to your ques... (show quote)
I think the iso 800 would have really helped me. I had the iso on auto. Thank you for your suggestions... I will give it a try OSOB
Nov 16, 2012 00:29:30 #
OSOBOSO wrote:
I don't think there is an easy answer to your ques... (show quote)
And the bright areas are brighter. This is not an improvement. The ONLY improvement as has been mentioned is to shoot with the sun behind and fill with a flash or two.
This is a good example of why you cannot just "fix it in Photoshop."
Nov 16, 2012 00:30:59 #
Changing the camera settings isn't going to change the outcome.
You need to do something to even out the light...change location, time of day, add some fill... anything to keep the leaf shadows off of the subjects. Easiest thing, if mother nature cooperates, is an overcast day.
You need to do something to even out the light...change location, time of day, add some fill... anything to keep the leaf shadows off of the subjects. Easiest thing, if mother nature cooperates, is an overcast day.
Nov 16, 2012 05:20:34 #
HI Turtlepond,
I learned many years ago 'Never' never take photos of people in 'dappled' sunlight. You could shoot 'contra jour' ie into the sun, but just be carefull and guard against lensflare.
Alternatively you could use fill flash but you are fighting a losing battle. Just don't try to beat dappled sunlight.
Scenes like this are great in real life but rarely convert to good photographic images.
I once saw some photos taken by a so called Wedding Photographer, he had shot the B&G in dappled sunlight , the images were truly awfull. In the sun or in the shadows usually work best. Norman.
I learned many years ago 'Never' never take photos of people in 'dappled' sunlight. You could shoot 'contra jour' ie into the sun, but just be carefull and guard against lensflare.
Alternatively you could use fill flash but you are fighting a losing battle. Just don't try to beat dappled sunlight.
Scenes like this are great in real life but rarely convert to good photographic images.
I once saw some photos taken by a so called Wedding Photographer, he had shot the B&G in dappled sunlight , the images were truly awfull. In the sun or in the shadows usually work best. Norman.
Nov 16, 2012 05:54:09 #
Avoid dappled sunlight always when doing any kind of portrait work,,,,it's just too much of a pain to deal with, even with a flash. Photography is all about the light,,,and IMHO it should always be the first thing you are considering when composing your shot. When the very first thing you start considering is the light,,your photography results will improve :)
Move your group up into the open shade in the foreground if possible,,and fill it with flash. Good luck.
Move your group up into the open shade in the foreground if possible,,and fill it with flash. Good luck.
Nov 16, 2012 05:59:40 #
skidooman wrote:
Avoid dappled sunlight always when doing any kind of portrait work,,,,it's just too much of a pain to deal with, even with a flash. Photography is all about the light,,,and IMHO it should always be the first thing you are considering when composing your shot. When the very first thing you start considering is the light,,your photography results will improve :)
thank you skidooman.. Great point. I will keep that in mind..
thank you ALL for you thoughts. A little thought before I shoot will help..
Nov 16, 2012 06:30:18 #
skidooman wrote:
Move your group up into the open shade in the foreground if possible,,and fill it with flash. Good luck.
Move your group up into the open shade in the foreground if possible,,and fill it with flash. Good luck.
I agree with Skidooman, there looks like a solid patch of shade in the foreground. If you had the room, you could use that. Alternatively, if you want the faces and not the outside of the building, the big office space behind them looks like a winner. You could probably use the fill flash on the group and still catch some sky or natural light behind them out the far side where the guy has his back to the shot. (Or if you're handy with a chainsaw.....)
Nov 16, 2012 08:32:35 #
One other note.
Since your going to do a reshoot.
Take charge of the group as well as the light.
It's common to pose the group in two or three rows.
I would do two rows. One kneeling and one standing.
Typically leaders(owners) on the end of the back row.
There are other alternatives. This is more of a classic setup.
Since your going to do a reshoot.
Take charge of the group as well as the light.
It's common to pose the group in two or three rows.
I would do two rows. One kneeling and one standing.
Typically leaders(owners) on the end of the back row.
There are other alternatives. This is more of a classic setup.
Nov 16, 2012 11:01:35 #
RoyLegrand
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Hi, Turtlepond!
I personally think that your picture is great!
Why not to approach form the artistic/improvisational point of view? Look at some pictures of an old masters, Rembrandt e.g.: Some people's faces are in the light, some in shade - and all this adds to the composition and the expression of the image.
The faces on tour photograph are ALL different, live, full of expressiveness and characters. They are all different, and that, in my humble opinion, makes them unique. More than that: they ALL are recognizable! Even the person who's holding the palm of his hand as a visor.
Who wants the uniformity in the group photo? Isn't there enough of this already, which makes us all as similar as nuts and bolts in the machine called "society"?
I like your photograph and would be honoured if my face was included into it.
Well, this is just my humble opinion...
I personally think that your picture is great!
Why not to approach form the artistic/improvisational point of view? Look at some pictures of an old masters, Rembrandt e.g.: Some people's faces are in the light, some in shade - and all this adds to the composition and the expression of the image.
The faces on tour photograph are ALL different, live, full of expressiveness and characters. They are all different, and that, in my humble opinion, makes them unique. More than that: they ALL are recognizable! Even the person who's holding the palm of his hand as a visor.
Who wants the uniformity in the group photo? Isn't there enough of this already, which makes us all as similar as nuts and bolts in the machine called "society"?
I like your photograph and would be honoured if my face was included into it.
Well, this is just my humble opinion...
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.