Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Photo Analysis
Exposures for very bright bird at end of day when there is tons of contrast
Page 1 of 2 next>
Dec 14, 2022 01:45:42   #
linda lagace
 
Iso was about 250 to 500, lens was 350 to 600, f = 1/13, speed = 1/1250 flexible spot metering,
It was the end of day, light was low and very contrasty, bird was very white, really wanted to get feather details, leaves were very dark orange

How do you approach setting exposure in the field and then how do you treat with photoshop.
I use the adobe bridge and change exposure, contrast, highlights, shadows, black, white, clarity and curve bars
I can use curves and levels and exposures and gradients in photoshop but prefer to do most everything on raw file in bridge. I don't like masking because my borders always look bad. As you can see here when I tone down the orange leaves i end up toning down birds bill. I could select the bill and saturate it more or less but again its really hard to accurately border it without making it look unnatural (at least in my hands) thanks for your comments. This is a brand new camera for me so I am learning how to hold it and focus properly and use back button focus and iso auto. I usually preferred manual with setting my iso manually and so far have not had too much luck with manual with auto iso since I then end up paying less attention to all my settings! Maybe it just takes time.













Reply
Dec 14, 2022 01:47:11   #
linda lagace
 
These look either garish or washed out to me and I have a hard time finding a happy medium,

Reply
Dec 14, 2022 03:06:06   #
Grahame Loc: Fiji
 
linda lagace wrote:
These look either garish or washed out to me and I have a hard time finding a happy medium,


Are these the originals or ones that you have worked on?

Reply
 
 
Dec 14, 2022 06:36:29   #
photophile Loc: Lakewood, Ohio, USA
 
linda lagace wrote:
Iso was about 250 to 500, lens was 350 to 600, f = 1/13, speed = 1/1250 flexible spot metering,
It was the end of day, light was low and very contrasty, bird was very white, really wanted to get feather details, leaves were very dark orange

How do you approach setting exposure in the field and then how do you treat with photoshop.
I use the adobe bridge and change exposure, contrast, highlights, shadows, black, white, clarity and curve bars
I can use curves and levels and exposures and gradients in photoshop but prefer to do most everything on raw file in bridge. I don't like masking because my borders always look bad. As you can see here when I tone down the orange leaves i end up toning down birds bill. I could select the bill and saturate it more or less but again its really hard to accurately border it without making it look unnatural (at least in my hands) thanks for your comments. This is a brand new camera for me so I am learning how to hold it and focus properly and use back button focus and iso auto. I usually preferred manual with setting my iso manually and so far have not had too much luck with manual with auto iso since I then end up paying less attention to all my settings! Maybe it just takes time.
Iso was about 250 to 500, lens was 350 to 600, f =... (show quote)


A lovely egret series.

Reply
Dec 14, 2022 06:49:00   #
selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA
 
linda lagace wrote:
Iso was about 250 to 500, lens was 350 to 600, f = 1/13, speed = 1/1250 flexible spot metering,
It was the end of day, light was low and very contrasty, bird was very white, really wanted to get feather details, leaves were very dark orange

How do you approach setting exposure in the field and then how do you treat with photoshop.

Your exposures were all only slightly darker than Sunny 16 (1/ISO seconds at Sunny 16 or equivalent):
LV 14.67=Sunny 16

Your darkest exposure:
Only about 1.7 stops darker

This indicates that the light was only slightly darker than broad daylight.

The critical objective in this case was to not blow the highlights in the birds' feathers and you succeeded.

Since they all were taken at about the same time, I would not have used the camera's meter at all. I would have exposed all of the images on full manual at about Sunny 16:


This would have resulted in identical exposures for the sky and background, no blown highlights and possibly no need for post processing unless the leaves were a little dark.

The main reason to avoid the camera's meter is that it can be fooled by the position of the birds.

Reply
Dec 14, 2022 12:43:55   #
R.G. Loc: Scotland
 
The trouble with such contrasty light is that everything is either shadow or not shadow. If you aren't shooting at the right angle the light won't be lighting the parts of the birds that you want it to light, and as a consequence you end up with more shadow than not shadow. Exposing for the shadows would have blown the highlights, which in this case is the directly lit feathers. In those circumstances you'd have to be very lucky to be shooting at just the right angle to see the birds illuminated in a way that you'd want. You obviously weren't that lucky so perhaps you should just write it off as a less than perfect shoot and take note of the lesson learned.

If it's proving difficult to select an object, one possibility if you're using a brush is to leave the auto masking off and deliberately over-select the object then switch to erase and switch the auto masking on for erasing the overshoot. That way the selecting is all done from outside the object via the erase brush. In your case the central cross in the erase brush would be using mostly the sky as its reference which would make it easy for the brush to detect the edge of the object (i.e. the beak). That should avoid having voids within the object and it would avoid having the selection stop short of the edges of the object.

Reply
Dec 14, 2022 14:44:43   #
linda lagace
 
Grahame wrote:
Are these the originals or ones that you have worked on?


ones that I worked on

Reply
 
 
Dec 14, 2022 14:45:08   #
linda lagace
 
photophile wrote:
A lovely egret series.


tks

Reply
Dec 14, 2022 14:48:21   #
linda lagace
 
selmslie wrote:
Your exposures were all only slightly darker than Sunny 16 (1/ISO seconds at Sunny 16 or equivalent):
LV 14.67=Sunny 16

Your darkest exposure:
Only about 1.7 stops darker

This indicates that the light was only slightly darker than broad daylight.

The critical objective in this case was to not blow the highlights in the birds' feathers and you succeeded.

Since they all were taken at about the same time, I would not have used the camera's meter at all. I would have exposed all of the images on full manual at about Sunny 16:


This would have resulted in identical exposures for the sky and background, no blown highlights and possibly no need for post processing unless the leaves were a little dark.

The main reason to avoid the camera's meter is that it can be fooled by the position of the birds.
Your exposures were all only slightly darker than ... (show quote)


I think I will try full manual from now on. i will need to test it a little more to be sure but I am heading in that direction. Thanks for this very helpful comment and analysis.

Reply
Dec 14, 2022 14:56:28   #
linda lagace
 
R.G. wrote:
The trouble with such contrasty light is that everything is either shadow or not shadow. If you aren't shooting at the right angle the light won't be lighting the parts of the birds that you want it to light, and as a consequence you end up with more shadow than not shadow. Exposing for the shadows would have blown the highlights, which in this case is the directly lit feathers. In those circumstances you'd have to be very lucky to be shooting at just the right angle to see the birds illuminated in a way that you'd want. You obviously weren't that lucky so perhaps you should just write it off as a less than perfect shoot and take note of the lesson learned.

If it's proving difficult to select an object, one possibility if you're using a brush is to leave the auto masking off and deliberately over-select the object then switch to erase and switch the auto masking on for erasing the overshoot. That way the selecting is all done from outside the object via the erase brush. In your case the central cross in the erase brush would be using mostly the sky as its reference which would make it easy for the brush to detect the edge of the object (i.e. the beak). That should avoid having voids within the object and it would avoid having the selection stop short of the edges of the object.
The trouble with such contrasty light is that ever... (show quote)


Thank you for your comments Its time for me to do some tutorials on auto masking and use of the brushes to intelligently select and deselect what I need to. You gave me a push in the right direction. As for the angle ----well I need to talk with the birds and the guy who sets up the "do not enter" signs at the refuge. I should have let these go but there's the hope that when I get home and on photoshop I can save a pic or two. And maybe for now good enough is good enough. Gives me the challenge to continue to try better it all.

Reply
Dec 14, 2022 14:58:51   #
Grahame Loc: Fiji
 
linda lagace wrote:
ones that I worked on


May be a good idea to post an unedited original jpeg, suggest No 1, which will allow for better advice re post processing. Otherwise we don't know what you started with.

Reply
 
 
Dec 14, 2022 15:35:23   #
linda lagace
 
Grahame wrote:
May be a good idea to post an unedited original jpeg, suggest No 1, which will allow for better advice re post processing. Otherwise we don't know what you started with.


tks guess I was too embarrassed also I wanted to know how my processing was

Reply
Dec 15, 2022 06:20:10   #
tcthome Loc: NJ
 
linda lagace wrote:
Thank you for your comments Its time for me to do some tutorials on auto masking and use of the brushes to intelligently select and deselect what I need to. You gave me a push in the right direction. As for the angle ----well I need to talk with the birds and the guy who sets up the "do not enter" signs at the refuge. I should have let these go but there's the hope that when I get home and on photoshop I can save a pic or two. And maybe for now good enough is good enough. Gives me the challenge to continue to try better it all.
Thank you for your comments Its time for me to do... (show quote)


Not optimal but in these shooting scenarios, these are very nice photos. You can Zoom in 2 to 1 to do your brush work (revive the beak & possible eye color). I'm going to guess/hope your using LR. Feather your brush & keep the inner circle of the brush inside the edges of the beak & the Auto Mask box is checked, the adjustment shouldn't go outside your selected area. Also I use a radial filter on the eye to do work on the eye if needed. = With a large zoom in/1:1 or 2:1 of course, to eg. raise exposure if in shadow.

Reply
Dec 15, 2022 12:09:41   #
imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida
 
linda lagace wrote:
Iso was about 250 to 500, lens was 350 to 600, f = 1/13, speed = 1/1250 flexible spot metering,
It was the end of day, light was low and very contrasty, bird was very white, really wanted to get feather details, leaves were very dark orange

How do you approach setting exposure in the field and then how do you treat with photoshop.
I use the adobe bridge and change exposure, contrast, highlights, shadows, black, white, clarity and curve bars
I can use curves and levels and exposures and gradients in photoshop but prefer to do most everything on raw file in bridge. I don't like masking because my borders always look bad. As you can see here when I tone down the orange leaves i end up toning down birds bill. I could select the bill and saturate it more or less but again its really hard to accurately border it without making it look unnatural (at least in my hands) thanks for your comments. This is a brand new camera for me so I am learning how to hold it and focus properly and use back button focus and iso auto. I usually preferred manual with setting my iso manually and so far have not had too much luck with manual with auto iso since I then end up paying less attention to all my settings! Maybe it just takes time.
Iso was about 250 to 500, lens was 350 to 600, f =... (show quote)


These are really not that "bad" at all ....most of the bird's body are in shadow and for that reason I would have given just a bit more exposure and leave the smaller highlight areas go ......brighter/loose a bit of detail.

You do not say what camera you are using - I will say that a 24MP or lower full frame body used at lowest possible ISO is your best chance at max DR (dynamic range). Shooting raw properly processed will also allow better shadow recovery.

Reply
Dec 15, 2022 19:12:49   #
linda lagace
 
Thanks for the comments and suggestions
Using a sony's ar7 iva ( based on the suggestions of all here when my d800 died, I bought the best lens I could afford sony 200-600 and then an affordable compatible mirrorless. Am pretty happy with going that route)
I believe that I used the crop setting on the camera so it should be about 24MP or so. I always shoot raw and have recently been playing with auto iso and manual but will go back to full manual since I seem to lose track of my iso and they have been running too high.
I had noticed much better pictures when I tend to a lower iso. But I do hand held and have to be careful of blur so use a fast shutter. Sometimes exposure is a problem depending on lighting etc.

Reply
Page 1 of 2 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Photo Analysis
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.