SuperFly48 Loc: NE ILLINOIS

Blown highlights can be and are a challenge especially when the subject scene has a LOT of contrast as in deep, dark shadows immediately adjacent to BRIGHT sunny areas....ALWAYS a challenge for me to take and save the shot. I use a polarizer a lot outdoors; if there is a hint of bright sunlight, the polarizer is probably on the lens of choice in use. That does not help with blown highlights for me. Lately I have been looking into ND filters, attempting to sort out exactly what they do and their best application(s). Then I discover some people will couple ND filters with a polarizer. One of my questions is.....WHY a ND filter? Why not simply underexpose the shot? Now I find out about something called "ETTR"......"Exposing to the right". I do mostly landscape shots any time I can escape and get out in the country. One of my personal challenges is to learn how to effectively photograph subjects that have deep, dark shadows and bright sunlight at the same time. Back in 2014 I got to go to southern OR and to Crater Lake specifically. Driving through the large forested areas on the way, I liked how the tall trees created interesting patterns of highlights and shadows on the forest floor. I thought "really cool stuff", if only I knew how to capture what my eye was seeing with my DSLR.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Speak more about how you use your camera's histogram and highlight indicators. Using an ND filter will help you shoot with a longer exposure or a wider aperture, but if you've got the wrong exposure for the situation, an ND filter isn't the most effective solution. Do you check the histogram as you determine the exposure? Highlight alerts?

Speak too about your post processing tools. In your forest floor reference example, if you exposed for the light through the trees, you can process the shadows later in post. You might also use a fill flash for the shadows, although maybe not applicable for your forest setting.

Speak more about your file settings. Exposing to the right for a RAW file will give you the most data in the file to recover those shadows in post as well as recovering highlights that may seem "lost" on the camera's display of the processed JPEG.

UTMike Loc: South Jordan, UT

Stay with your quest. Paul can give you spot on advice e with the correct information (also, I am peeking to learn too).

kskarma Loc: Topeka, KS

Some of your situations seem tailor made for the use of HDR. (OK...I know that many times the HDR photos that get posted are very "Over-Processed" to the point they look garish)...BUT HDR used with some restraint can really save the day in places where the range of light intensity is waaaay beyond the ability of either film or digital sensors to record successfully. The interior of a church is a good example of this...dark pews in poorly lit corners coupled with very bright sun-light streaming through the stained glass windows.... Here is where taking a series of 'bracketed shots' can rescue the photo.

In your forest example, you might try a 3 or 5 shot bracketed sequence with a full stop between the exposures....except for extreme situations, this should give you plenty of exposure information for a PhotoEditor to process. My personal favorite HDR program is Photomatix, but there are many others....this is just the one I've used for a long time and am comfortable with it...shop around if you like... Photoshop has an HDR option, as well..and many current DSLRs have a wide range of bracketing options...mine can do a 9 frame series, so with a full stop between images, that provides all the exposure options I could ever need...

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

ETTR is not going to help in this situation and if you use it wrong it might make matters worse.

Your primary goal is to not blow the highlights and as CHG_CANON mentioned, watching your histogram and especially your highlight warnings are your best option.

I posted a response on another thread that might help.

With your D850 you can recover a lot of shadow information during the raw conversion on your computer because it is ISO invariant. But for the kind of images you posted here you may not actually want to recover much shadow information. They look fine as they are. And even though some highlights might technically be blown, they are so small that they don't detract from the image.

If you still have issues with too much dynamic range and can't recover both the highlights and shadows to your satisfaction, your only solution will be HDR.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

You basically have two options, and both require post processing expertise.

Option 1. Rely on the camera's dynamic range, optimize it by shooting raw, and measure the highlights that you want to retain detail in, using the camera's spot meter mode, then add anywhere from 1 to 2 stops additional exposure beyond the meter reading. When in a raw converter, do full recovery on highlights and shadows, set your black and white clipping points carefully, and you will get a usable image. The shadows may need a tad more help, as they will be a little noisy, but you can mask the deepest shadows and apply more aggressive noise reduction and contrast than you would to the rest of the image.

Option 2. Exposure blending or HDR. You shoot two or more exposures - one that gets the highlights easily within the range of the camera's ability to record them, then you make the second exposure so that the deepest shadows are just below middle gray, which keeps them clean. Then you use either layer masks to manually merge (composite) the two exposures taking the best of each, or you can use an HDR blend, either in your primary editor, or in a third party package like Photomatix Pro.

Cameras are limited, and post processing removes some of those limits.

RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA

Ilford XP2 Super is made for the scenes you describe.

mborn Loc: Massachusetts

7

pithydoug Loc: Catskill Mountains, NY

And depending on the number a F/stops difference, try HDR to cover the extremes. Shoot single but try some +/- 1 to 3 stops HDR. Many cameras have this ability built in. Some will generate a jpg as an output file, but it's the raw files that can be saved so you can do the combining. The jpg is marginal at best. This does not mean you have to post process to give it that abused "HDR" effect but a better raw files. However you expose, as pointed out, the histogram is your bible. I have the histogram displayed in the rev screen so I can chimp and make changes so I keep the image between the goal posts. To note - don't blow out the whites - you can't get them back. Shadows can be massaged.

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

Check out some of Joe Brady's YouTube videos on Sekonic meters and the ColorChecker Passport. He covers landscape shooting and how to get good exposures.

Best,
Todd Ferguson

CaptainPhoto

https://www.digitalphotomentor.com/exposure-blending-in-photoshop-a-beginners-tutorial/

here is an excellent resource on exposure-blending in Photoshop vs HDR.

fetzler Loc: North West PA

Blown highlights are indeed a problem. They occur when the brightness range of the scene is too great. You can ignore them is the area of the photo is small and unimportant. You can also adjust your exposure to bring the highlights down to the proper range. If you shoot raw files with a Nikon there are several image modes such as Vivid, Flat, Portrait etc. In the Nikon Software you can change this mode in post a determine which is best. Other software can do similar things. This may help.
The next choice is to make a pseudo HDR from your Raw file. Prepare a Tiff files with the exposure set to 0, +1, -1 EV and combine these into an HDR. You will pick us details in the highlights and shadows. The next option is to make an HDR from several separate exposures.

Notice NO ND filters. ND filters are to allow one to reduce the effective ISO. The Minimum ISO on my Nikon is 100. If you would like to show motion blur in the water in a stream I might need to reduce the effective ISO to 3 or 6 or 12 to use a sufficiently long exposure. Alternatively, I might like use a wide aperture and an ND would allow this. Polarizes are effective in reducing reflections. I often use these in landscapes as the reflections are removed, the blue sky is darkened and the color saturation of foliage and other objects is increased. ND filters are very important to shooting video in bright light.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Those of us recording lots of video use heavy ND filters in bright sun for shallow DOF. At ISO 200 (base ISO on my Lumix) and 1/25 second (for 24fps cinema video), you have to!