arphot Loc: Massachusetts

Perhaps not to a novice in the field. Once you get used to terminology it makes sense. Brackets are meant to hold things in . . . in this case, exposures. A grouping of similar items or variables, like in math.

MtnMan Loc: ID

Hi,

I don't know but the instructor in a class I attended recently claimed that the range for film is "11" and that for digital is "5". The quotes are because I have no idea what the numbers referred to.

Many WEB sites give the dynamic range for varous camera sensors. The newer sensors tend to be in the range of 12-13. Again I don't know what the number means. I don't think it is the same as the above numbers. But it might be.

Can anyone shed some light on these numbers?

Regards,
Larry Leach

MtnMan Loc: ID

Hi,

Just to mention some related things. I have a Nikon D5100. It enables auto bracketing with three shots with a preselected plus or minus EV. What it uses for changing EV (f-stop or exposure time) depends on the selected picture mode. For HDR most suggest using the aperture priority mode. When you do that the camera changes the exposure time to do the bracketing.

Most HDR folk seem to prefer five shots. To do that you do two groups of three and throw out one of the middle ones.

You can also bracket on white balance but I'd have to pull the manual to refresh on how to do that. It could be useful in some situations.

The D5100 also has in-camera HDR. I think this is a relatively new camera feature. I don't know if other cameras have it also now. The D5100 uses two shots for that. You input the EV range for the two shots and something about smoothing. So far I have not been impressed with it. Most HDR experts think two shots isn't enough so maybe that is why. (There are a few who synthesize HDR in Photoshop with only one exposure but the hard core HDR crowd disses that.) But I have to believe Nikon tested this feature so suspect I may just have not had appropriate subjects yet for it to do its thing.

The D5100 also has a thing called "Active D-lighting". It is intended to do something similar to HDR: enhance detail in the ohterwise over and underexposed areas. It seems to work pretty good. I leave it on most of the time. It doesn't seem to hurt anything. I believe other cameras have something similar by other names. In many cases it obviates the need for bracketing.

Regards,
Larry Leach

neil43

Why a crutch? Bracketing is essential for the best outcome in HDR. Otherwise, it is useful in capturing movement.

llindstrand Loc: Seattle Metro

I shoot a lot of HDR images and must bracket for that. In addition I quite often bracket in imperfect lighting conditions either too much or too little sun. Then I choose the best exposure, edit it and throw away the others. Also I've been known to cut and paste parts of one image over an overexposed section of another one. I find it very helpful!

RMM Loc: Suburban New York

Some cameras can perform HDR within the camera, and as Larry mentioned, this is a newer feature. Others use HDR in software. While HDR can balance exposure, showing detail in both underlit and overlit areas, one criticism (with which I agree) is that often, the results have a plastic look, lots of detail, but unrealistic lighting.

With bracketing, it's possible to layer your shots and vary the opacity of selected areas to balance the tones in a program like Photoshop. Labor intensive, but you have more control over the results.

Personally, I seldom use the bracketing feature on my camera, though sometimes I do when I'm not sure how things will turn out. But I usually end up selecting one of the bracketed shots as being the best overall, and maybe doing some work on that one shot to improve it. The camera captures a lot of information that can be pulled out, even if it doesn't show up at the original exposure.

Pathfinder Loc: Naches, Wa

[quote=brucewells]Please correct me if I'm wrong, but bracketing originated with film photography where you don't have the luxury of seeing your photographic results immediately. So, photographers would take their shot, then stop down/up and take another or two, just to make sure they had the result they were wanting. Of course, they still wouldn't know for certain until they came out of the darkroom. The concept is a carried over into the digital world, and many have found creativeness in the realm of HDR (high dynamic range) photography, which requires bracketing
Hey there Bruce, when anyone askes me what bracketing is, I tell them it's really called KENTUCKY WINDAGE! Then I have to explain Kentucky windage, plus explain bracketing!!!!Oh well..
Part of the game............Jim

Pathfinder Loc: Naches, Wa

[quote=brucewells]Please correct me if I'm wrong, but bracketing originated with film photography where you don't have the luxury of seeing your photographic results immediately. So, photographers would take their shot, then stop down/up and take another or two, just to make sure they had the result they were wanting. Of course, they still wouldn't know for certain until they came out of the darkroom. The concept is a carried over into the digital world, and many have found creativeness in the realm of HDR (high dynamic range) photography, which requires bracketing

Meives Loc: FORT LAUDERDALE

I was fortunate to be able to photograph a total solar eclipse. Bracketting was used not to be safe, but 4 different settings gave you 4 different pictures, all good.

mooseeyes Loc: Sonora, California

====

a poor conversationalist at a party?[/quote]

Now that is funny! I have wanted to do just that any number of times. . . :mrgreen:

mooseeyes Loc: Sonora, California

:thumbup:

This is correct. Back when we were shooting film, it was more important to really have a handle on the range of the film we were shooting. As a general rule of thumb, slide film would have a 3 stop range, or less (R process); color print film (C process) would have an approximate 5 stop range, or less; and, depending on the specific film used, B&W film would run anywhere from a 7 to 9 stop range. For example, a high key image one would not want to use the Kodak T-grain films, but the use of the chromogenic Ilford XP1 would be great for hight key subjects, picking up all the details across the image range. For a more "flat" range image, the reverse would be true.

Today, with digital cameras and programs like PhotoShop, bracketing is not as important as it used to be with film. I can't recall that last time that I saw someone using both a digital camera and a hand held light meter; however, I still do so in certain lighting conditions. No camera and/or film can ever see the same tonal range as the human eye. . .so we strive to reach an acceptable range in our 2D medium.

As an additional note, back in the day, most all commercial shots were done with slide film (very narrow range), and over 80% of all published photos were taken with a good 50mm lens. Things have certainly changed over the years. In the digital world, with instant preview, knowing lighting, and having PhotoShop. . .there really is not any need to bracket your shots, except for HDR.

jackinkc Loc: Kansas City

I always shoot in RAW without bracketing.

Turbo Loc: Raleigh, NC

Think about it this way:

( My numbers may be off a bit )

Light intensity (Illuminance)is measured in EV ( or LUX). Zero EV being very dark and 20 Ev being very bright.

The human eye can clearly discern a ( dynamic ) range of about 17 Ev.

Unfortunately, a camera sensor can only handle about 10 or 11EV . So if you are taking a picture of something with a range of 15EV, your camera will turn the dark spots into black and the bright spots into total white.

The need for bracketing is to darken the brights and illuminate the dark a bit. Now you can play with Photoshop and layer the different parts together, to preserve details in the darkest and the brightest areas.

RAW pics have about 1 Stop greater range, so that is extra flexibility.

Finch585 Loc: Northern California

Is Active-D lighting just for use with a flash?

Pathfinder Loc: Naches, Wa

I don't think that active D lighting is for flash at all! Not in my camera at least. But then who am I too say, I'm just shooting with an Olympus! Just possibly the most expensive camera in the world. At least judging from the 5 Billion dollar fleecing of the company funds. Or most likely the stockholders got fleeced. Did I change the subject? Sorry---