Frustrated snapper - Sky

mikebeecham

mikebeecham

Suspended / Banned
Messages
212
Name
Mike
Edit My Images
No
Hi guys, I'm sure this is a really basic question, but I have a bunch of really frustrating shots that I took today in a forest.

It was a really nice time of the day, the sun in coming down, the forest isn't too dark, so I thought I would shoot some nice photos, thinking they would come out kinda balanced.

When I get them home, the forest shots were not that bad, but all the sky is white, there is no blue in there, and you couldn't see any of the clouds. I guess somehow I've overexposed the shot, but not sure how. I set the camera to AV mode, thinking that it would 'take care of' all the other elements, but I guess not.

So I suppose my question is how can I get a nicely balanced shot of decent quality landscape shots with a nice blue sky and clouds?

These were shot with my Canon 600d and the 18-55mm Kit lens.

Thanks
 
At a guess, I'd say the camera has exposed for the forest, which has meant a bright sky has got even more overexposed. However, you really need to post an example for us to be sure - stick a pic on the thread and I'm sure you'll get plenty of help.

Mike
 
Hi Nick, thanks for the reply.

Since I'm not sure I can spend any more money right now, is there any way to set the camera up so that I have a better chance of not shooting white skys?
 
mikebeecham said:
Hi Nick, thanks for the reply.

Since I'm not sure I can spend any more money right now, is there any way to set the camera up so that I have a better chance of not shooting white skys?
Click to expand...

An example image may help as Mike mentioned.

The only way I can think to balance the exposure would be to take 2 or more shots; one exposed for the sky and one exposed for the foreground / land. Then you would need to merge the 2 in photoshop / paintshop / gimp etc.
 
What processing software do you have?
 
pooley said:
At a guess, I'd say the camera has exposed for the forest, which has meant a bright sky has got even more overexposed. However, you really need to post an example for us to be sure - stick a pic on the thread and I'm sure you'll get plenty of help.

Mike
Click to expand...

Hi mate, an example would be this one...although others came out worse, especially when there was a larger balance of sky to landscape:

example.jpg


Thanks, and any help you can provide would be greatly appreciated.
 
Standard problem,the range of exposures in the scene exceeds the dynamic range of the camera sensor. So if you expose for the trees you overexpose the sky and if you expose for the sky you underexpose the trees.
First shoot in RAW that way you have a better chance of pulling the overexposed bits back.
You have two options in this case (1)take 2 shots ,one correctly exposed for the trees and one correctly exposed for the sky and blend them together in your editing program or (2) and this costs money buy a set of Neutral density graduated filters and use these to reduce the exposure difference between the sky and the landscape.
If you google ND Grad filters you will get a lot more info.

Cheers
 
It's because there's too much of a difference between the relative brightness of the sky and the relative shadow if not actual darkness of the forest and the camera can't capture the whole dynamic range.

I suppose getting a shot like this to look good is a balancing act. You have to both avoid blowing the highlights, because you may not recover them when processing the shot, and you need to avoid ending up with the forest looking too dark, because it'll look horrible if you have to boost it too much in post capture processing.

If you have live view you may be able to get a good idea what the shot is going to look like (you may have blinking clipped highlights) before shooting. You may even be able to get an in view histograme. Alternatively you could meter the scene, take a shot and then take another shot if necessary with a slightly faster shutter speed... and so on. Or you could go HDR.

PS. ND's or rather grads may not be much use in a forest as there's probably no no clear divide between trees and sky.
 
That example doesn't look too far off. Maybe you could have just taken the shot and quickly dialled in some compensation and taken another shot. I think you should be able to retain the sky and not have to boost the shadows too much.
 
Without filters you may well not be able to expose correctly if the scene has high contrast (bright sky, dark forest), you can have one or the other.

The Grad ND will help because the camera will see less light there, helping to balance out the image.

What are you using to pre-process the picture ? some applications (like lightroom) can add a graduated tint to an image.
 
I agree with what Chris (and others) has mentioned above.

Camera sensors do not have the ability to recognise and record the difference in light the way our eyes can. Once you get tuned into visualising the end result it becomes quite simple to predict results like this.

Have a look for an ND filter - it needn't cost the earth.

Mike
 
Where are you going to line up a grad in a shot like that?

Personally I wouldn't bother.
 
Craft said:
Without filters you may well not be able to expose correctly if the scene has high contrast (bright sky, dark forest), you can have one or the other.

The Grad ND will help because the camera will see less light there, helping to balance out the image.

What are you using to pre-process the picture ? some applications (like lightroom) can add a graduated tint to an image.
Click to expand...

Hi mate!

I'm using lightroom to process a lot of my photos although, because I dont know the software THAT well, I'm more tinkering in there than anything else.

People are talking a lot about the Grad ND...would you mind perhaps linking me to some that I might have to start thinking about buying. Will it have that much an effect due to me only using the Kit Lens...is that a consideration? I'm waiting for a new 50mm f1.4 prime to arrive and wonder if that will make much of a difference?

Thanks
 
mikebeecham said:
Hi mate!

I'm using lightroom to process a lot of my photos although, because I dont know the software THAT well, I'm more tinkering in there than anything else.

People are talking a lot about the Grad ND...would you mind perhaps linking me to some that I might have to start thinking about buying. Will it have that much an effect due to me only using the Kit Lens...is that a consideration? I'm waiting for a new 50mm f1.4 prime to arrive and wonder if that will make much of a difference?

Thanks
Click to expand...

I've sent you a PM with a link to a cheap starter kit I've used :)
 
The actual lens will make no difference.
 
To get the best result from a single image, shoot in RAW, expose as far to the right on the histogram as you can without blowing the highlights (never used a Canon but I assume that you can set it so when you review the picture any blown bits will flash in black - if that happens dial in a bit of exposure compensation and take the picture again), and then bring up the shadows/reduce the highlights in Lightroom as appropriate. It's best to reduce the highlights rather than raising the shadows as that tends to introduce noise.

Taking two pictures and blending them would work, but you would need a tripod and you could have strange effects if there are moving subjects.
 
A grad in a shot like won't work.. You will have the tops of the tress a lot darker than the rest and it won't look right. The only way is exposure bending, or hope that there is enough data to pull back using the highlight recovery in Lightroom. You could also use the grad tool in Lightroom, then use the an adjustment brush to bring the darkened area of the trees back to proper exposure, but that's a very long winded way of doing it.
 
Amen to the grads not working. I thought I was a voice in the wilderness on this subject.

Looking at the shot I may be wrong but it doesn't look that far off to me and I'm pretty sure that evaluative metering and some exposure compensation would get a shot that would retain the highlights without needing the shadows to be boosted too much.

The trick is in judging it and dialling in the right amount of compo.

This is where the new digital things such as live view, blinkies and in view histogrames can be a big help. I'd struggle to nail that shot first time with my 5D and I'd probably take two shots, one trusting the camera to meter and one with compensation. With my G1 and in view histograme I'd be confident of getting a good balance with one shot.
 
Woof woof,

Thanks for the info...I'm really new to digital photography, so will look into how to do the 'evaluative metering' thing.

So if I took two shots, one trusting AV to get me a decent shot, and one where I exposed it for the sky, would I blend them in Lightroom? Also, wouldn't it new having to make sure I took exactly the same shot twice?
 
Didn't see the example shot before my previous post.

Yeah a grad wont work in that case because of the trees to the left.

For that pic try dragging the "highlights" slider down until the sky comes back, its all a bit of a compromise so play with contrast, exposure, highlights and shadow sliders, it could well be savable. (Assuming shot in RAW).

Hitech grads are inexpensive: http://www.teamworkphoto.com/hitech-grad-filters-c-1047_78_1115_767_277.html

You'll need a holder and adapter ring:
cokin-p-filter-holder-67mm-adaptor-ring-2.99-28633-p[ekm]499x374[ekm].jpg


I got mine from premier-ink.co.uk for a few quid each, 58mm ring for the kit lens I think.
 
Craft said:
Didn't see the example shot before my previous post.

I got mine from premier-ink.co.uk for a few quid each, 58mm ring for the kit lens I think.
Click to expand...

Me too :thumbs: Ive sent the OP a PM with the link attached
 
mikebeecham said:
Woof woof,

Thanks for the info...I'm really new to digital photography, so will look into how to do the 'evaluative metering' thing.

So if I took two shots, one trusting AV to get me a decent shot, and one where I exposed it for the sky, would I blend them in Lightroom? Also, wouldn't it new having to make sure I took exactly the same shot twice?
Click to expand...

Evaluative metering just looks at the whole image and averages the exposure out. Other exposure modes do things differently, for example spot metering just looks at a very small part of the scene.

Faced with a scene like yours and accepting that you have to take the shot quite quickly as your chums are walking towards you... what I personally would do is let the camera meter the shot in AV just in case it gets it right and then just in case it blows the sky... as it has done here... I'd dial in some exposure compensation, again in AV, so that the camera takes the shot using a faster shutter speed. This will, we hope, keep the sky but make the forest look slightly dark.

Assuming that it's the second shot that you're going to use, the thing to do would be to load it into your processing software and lighten the forest part of the scene.

I wouldn't bother trying to blend two images as I doubt you'll take two the same in this situation.

Personally I'd shoot RAW too as I think it helps in situations like this.
 
Last edited:
Would you always shoot raw, or do you interchange with JPEG, depending on the situation ?
 
Personally I always shoot RAW.

I don't spend a lot of time processing shots. Usually I just apply my standard setting to a batch and I then look at each shot in turn and spend literally just a few additional seconds on any that need extra attention so shootng RAW is no big pain for me.

The only situation I could see myself shooting JPEG would be in a very high volume and quick turn around situation... like a relative of mine who used to take shots of people in clubs. There's no way she could have shot RAW and processed each shot for best effect and got them out to the customers in the required time.

If you are not shooting hundreds of shots that have to be processed in minutes I think RAW is probably best.
 
Interesting! I'm not sure why but I just set up the camera to use JPEG...I guess I just worried that I would use up my 32gb card too quickly!

Perhaps I need to move over to RAW and see if that helps with my processing afterwards.
 
As the rest of the scene is fairly bright I would think a bit of negative exposure comp is all that needed. The foreground would have been a bit darker which you could then have pulled back with little to no ill effects.
As bright skies and dark ground go this one is pretty minor...
 
ernesto said:
As the rest of the scene is fairly bright I would think a bit of negative exposure comp is all that needed. The foreground would have been a bit darker which you could then have pulled back with little to no ill effects.
As bright skies and dark ground go this one is pretty minor...
Click to expand...

Ok mate, thats good to know...so perhaps what I should have done is knock down the metering by maybe a stop or two (if I have that right??), and this would have bought the brightness down....then raise the darker areas of the landscape up in Lightroom?

I *think* I understand that right?
 
Yes, that is what I was getting at. Although as others have said raising shadows can sometimes produce bad results but in this case they shoudl only need a minor tweak.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top