Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Photo Gallery
Its Finally Snowing in Chicagop
Jan 12, 2012 14:00:52   #
Nikon_DonB Loc: Chicago
 
If I undferstand this right, I should underexpose by 2 stops to get really white snow. Correct? How does my tree look?

Sorry for the redundancy. Don



Reply
Jan 12, 2012 14:11:08   #
notnoBuddha
 
Your tree looks dormant and cold. As to white snow - what are you using for your white balance setting? I don't know anything about the 2 stop under exposure thing; not saying there is nothing to it. Just don't understand the why.

Reply
Jan 12, 2012 14:35:30   #
richardp1958 Loc: Los Angeles
 
Nikon_DonB wrote:
If I undferstand this right, I should underexpose by 2 stops to get really white snow. Correct? How does my tree look?

Sorry for the redundancy. Don


I think it is the opposite, overexpose by 1 to 2 stops for really white snow. This is according to Bryan Peterson in Understanding
Exposure.

Reply
 
 
Jan 12, 2012 14:56:27   #
shadow1284 Loc: Mid-West Michigan
 
One of the things I do to emphsize the snow falling is to use my 580ex flash. It relects off the falling snow and then allows for focus on the rest of the scene. It ususlly gives quite a good effect.
Also I live in West Michigan and it's tp turn white.

Reply
Jan 12, 2012 15:30:17   #
Guy Johnstone Loc: Ocean Shores WA
 
you need to overexpose. I don't know that it's two stops. Your cameras meter wants to turn all that white to 18% gray. It'll do the same thing with the sand at the beach. If you overexposed too much you'll lose detail in the highlights. I would start with one stop and work from there. Your white balance looks right on. It should be set for sunlight.
On the other side of the coin. If you're shooting images that are predominately black, you'll want to under expose. Here again your camera will want to turn all that black 18% gray. why does your camera want to turn everything 18%? gray you might ask. The answer is because most everything, grass in particular, reflects 18% of the light that falls on it. So that has long been the photographic standard for metering.

Reply
Jan 12, 2012 15:43:55   #
Nikon_DonB Loc: Chicago
 
richardp1958 wrote:
Nikon_DonB wrote:
If I undferstand this right, I should underexpose by 2 stops to get really white snow. Correct? How does my tree look?

Sorry for the redundancy. Don


I think it is the opposite, overexpose by 1 to 2 stops for really white snow. This is according to Bryan Peterson in Understanding
Exposure.


It Figures....I have it "bas ackwards". I will try again. Thanks.

Reply
Jan 12, 2012 15:54:12   #
Old Timer Loc: Greenfield, In.
 
Does any one use custom wh Balance for snow. I am trying it out, seems to be working alright and setting exposure up 2 notches.

Reply
 
 
Jan 12, 2012 15:59:37   #
Nikon_DonB Loc: Chicago
 
Guy Johnstone wrote:
you need to overexpose. I don't know that it's two stops. Your cameras meter wants to turn all that white to 18% gray. It'll do the same thing with the sand at the beach. If you overexposed too much you'll lose detail in the highlights. I would start with one stop and work from there. Your white balance looks right on. It should be set for sunlight.
On the other side of the coin. If you're shooting images that are predominately black, you'll want to under expose. Here again your camera will want to turn all that black 18% gray. why does your camera want to turn everything 18%? gray you might ask. The answer is because most everything, grass in particular, reflects 18% of the light that falls on it. So that has long been the photographic standard for metering.
you need to overexpose. I don't know that it's two... (show quote)


Wouldn't I want the WB set to cloudy since it is snowing and overcast?

Reply
Jan 12, 2012 16:32:16   #
Nikon_DonB Loc: Chicago
 
Guy Johnstone wrote:
you need to overexpose. I don't know that it's two stops. Your cameras meter wants to turn all that white to 18% gray. It'll do the same thing with the sand at the beach. If you overexposed too much you'll lose detail in the highlights. I would start with one stop and work from there. Your white balance looks right on. It should be set for sunlight.
On the other side of the coin. If you're shooting images that are predominately black, you'll want to under expose. Here again your camera will want to turn all that black 18% gray. why does your camera want to turn everything 18%? gray you might ask. The answer is because most everything, grass in particular, reflects 18% of the light that falls on it. So that has long been the photographic standard for metering.
you need to overexpose. I don't know that it's two... (show quote)


You are correct sir. I did change wb to cloudy and tried overexposing at 1 2/3 and 2 stops. What do you think?

1 2/3 stops overexposed
1 2/3 stops overexposed...

2 stops overexposed
2 stops overexposed...

1 1/3 stops overexposed
1 1/3 stops overexposed...

Reply
Jan 12, 2012 17:13:30   #
erwinrm
 
+1 2/3 looks about right to me.

Reply
Jan 13, 2012 12:07:21   #
lincoln85 Loc: Sun City, Arizona
 
how about this?? :?: :?: :?:



Reply
 
 
Jan 13, 2012 12:27:13   #
Guy Johnstone Loc: Ocean Shores WA
 
lincoln85 wrote:
how about this?? :?: :?: :?:


You have lost most of the highlight detail. And the "mood" has changed with the increased saturation. That change is subjective. Depending on what the photographer would choose to convey.

Reply
Jan 13, 2012 12:43:25   #
Guy Johnstone Loc: Ocean Shores WA
 
it's supposed to snow this weekend in Seattle. If I get a chance maybe I'll make a few pictures. I used to live in Chicago as well. I prefer Seattle snow. It's not around as long. If I miss the snow, haven't yet, it's about 45 min. to the mountains. I like to try to drive up there for the first snowfall. Not so much to see the snow, but to count the brand-new Jeep Grand Cherokee's on their side.

Reply
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Photo Gallery
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.