sford122 Loc: Amarillo TX

I realize there are many PP programs and add-ons out there that could make this a more decent picture. However, since I only have Photoshop Elements 11 to work with, would anyone like to PP my original, only using PSE 11 and tell me what you did for improvements? I cropped the picture, used lighten and darken tools and then contrast and brightness in the guided section. (I'm a real newbie in PP.)

Original


Post Processed in PSE 11

Nikonian72 Loc: Chico CA

Your image is 1-stop or more over-exposed, so no detail in highlights.

sford122 Loc: Amarillo TX

Hi Douglass. Well, I could see that the white hairs were over-exposed, blown-out (if that's the correct term) and hoped to get feedback from others on how to correct it in PSE. I tried a quick-guide in PSE 11 for exposure, which gave me 9 options to chose from, but none seemed to do the trick. However, I am so glad you forced me to face the real issue... why can't I get good exposure to start with. Here is what I typically do:

for 1:1 macro, I set my camera to manual, f/18, 1/200 sec shutter and 200 ISO, our old standards, and manual flash at 1/1. When I do this, my on-camera exposure shows extremely under-exposed, all the way to the left at a setting of -3 and the picture is dark (under-exposed) on camera display. At this point, I up my manual flash setting (if it is not already at 1/1) and just do the best I can. I do not understand why my camera is reflecting the -3. To be able to get the meter to come back up to -0-, I have to slow the shutter speed way down to 4 tenths of a second and then even though the exposure is then supposedly set correctly at -0-, the picture is completely over-exposed to nearly white. I've known this is a big problem for some time, but I've been working mostly on trying to focus better. I don't know what to do about the exposure, other than trying to correct in PP. I'm going to PM gym and have him look at this and see if he has any ideas, since we use the same camera and flash, I think. Any ideas?

LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field

Your camera meter is reading the "pre-flash" exposure. Ideally, your flash should supplement the ambient light reading. In other words, set your exposure as close to daylight as possible and then adjust the manual flash ratio until it supplements-- but does not overpower--the ambient light reading. My SB400 (nikon) is a lightweight in terms of guide number and is heavily diffused. My starting manual flash adjustment is 1/4.

Based on what you've said, I have two observations: Your camera exposure is underexposing and the flash should be cut back.

Make sense? Douglas is better at this. I'm "pinch hitting".

;-)

sford122 Loc: Amarillo TX

Actually LRF it kind of does. A lot of the times I'm not in good light and the camera is metering my poor lighting. However, if I greatly increase my aperture to compensate the camera metering, I'm adding way to much light due to the additional flash lighting, plus the fact it is destroying my depth of field. I'll just have to keep experimenting. Thanks for your feedback.

Nikonian72 Loc: Chico CA

LRF is correct. For macro, I strongly recommend ALL camera settings and speedlight settings to Manual, and ignore your meter, which is trying to expose your Field of View to 18% gray, using available light.

Choose your ISO (I now use 200), set your shutter duration to 1/200-sec (fastest allowable for speedlight sync), choose your aperture (I start at f/16), and set your speedlight to 1/4-power. I use small central spot for A-F, but many others manual focus.

Take your first photo, and evaluate exposure on LCD, using an HoodLoupe. If you need more or less light, bump only your speedlight output.

Hoodman HoodLoupe 3.0 LCD screen hood loupe

LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field

If it helps establish a starting point, here's what I did: I set up my rig, exposure (iso+ shutter duration+aperture), flash settings, etc and then set my macro lens at 1:1. I then took a photo of an 18% gray card and then checked the histogram. Your exposure should be right in the middle of the histogram. This is my beginning reference point. Some adjustments will have to be made based on available light and the lightness/darkness of the subject. This process should get you close.

sford122 Loc: Amarillo TX

I do everything you stated above, except I start at f/18 instead of f/16. I'll try that. And I don't have a HoodLoupe (yet). I've ordered the fotodiox softbox(like yours) and will see what I can do with that. My photography bank is about bankrupt and I'm going to just have to do the best I can with what I have for now.

As my new Avatar suggests, I'm not totally displeased with my last photo. :) As always... thanks for your help.

Nikonian72 Loc: Chico CA

There is only 1/3-stop difference between f/16 and f/18.
You new avatar is excellent!

sford122 Loc: Amarillo TX

Thanks Douglass! I practiced a bunch on a little jumper out on my chain link fence last night. I used f/16 instead of f/18, 1/200 sec and 200 ISO. I started with 1/4 power and then (1/4 + 0.3), (1/4 + 0.7), 1/2, (1/2 + 0.3) and (1/2 + 0.7) for a six picture set. I then compared the differences. It was a good exercise. After downloading on my computer, I realized he was having dinner of some sort, maybe a tiny red spider. I'd post the cropped series, but they aren't that good. I did have a lot of fun though!

LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field

My wife thinks I'm a lunatic. I see a critter and run for the macro setup. Do you have a set of tubes? I've been starting out with my 36mm tube + the 105 macro. I can still rotate the focus ring if the critter is larger than would fit on a cropped sensor at 1:1. After getting the lighting "correct", the other key is to watch the alignment for DOF. If you can keep the plane of the critter parallel to the front lens, you can use the shallow DOF to your advantage.

Best....

sford122 Loc: Amarillo TX

I know what you mean. My husband just smiles now. It's the neighbors that think I'm looney. I do have a set of extension tubes and have only had really good results using indoors on a tripod (for small flowers). I'll get there eventually. Thanks for the encouragement.