Metering landscape shots

[siejones]

I usually take a reading off the horizon where the land meets the sky and lock that exposure when taking distance view landscape shots.

My goal is to have a good medium exposure so that neither the ground or sky is blown out either in shadow or highlight. That way if the exposure is off later at least I still have the detail there to PP later.

How do you guys meter for landscapes? Am I using the best method or....?

Ta

Sie

 

[Marcel]

Personally, if its a shot that has an equal amount of sky, I tend to rely on my 30D's "Evaluative Metering" mode, checking the histogram afterwards to check the exposure, and also check for clipping of the shadows or highlights.
If there is no sky, I may try some spot metering on a 'natures green' which are supposed to be considered a mid tone.

 

[SDK^]

For landscape photos I shoot in RAW format with the intention of converting the final image to HDR.

Exposure is a tricky one because there is a 'rule' that says you should expose for the highlights and recover the shadow details in your image editor. However, doing this with a HDR shot means the shadows will show a high amount of noise. So for that reason I tend to balance the exposure in the middle and make adjustments to the RAW file to maximise the dynamic range.

Clearly clipping highlights isn't recommended as you cannot recover the details once it’s solid white.

 

[siejones]

Thanks for replys

I have used HDR before but even if you have set AB on the camera and shot in relatively quick sucessusion you get cloud blur on the result due to them moving and therefore anything moving.

I currently use a method of one step less exposure given to a RAW file on the Raw processing then one on one step more. Bringing them both into photoshop and layering one on top of the other. Then I use a sub mask and use a gradient to give an emulated ND effect. I think this produces a great result and it even looks like you have used an ND.

The thing is I would rather have to avoid said processing and get it right first time. I know in some circumstances the range will be too great and in these circumstances I want good metering to make sure nothing is blown out. In others with proper metering you can pull off the shot if your on the edge of the range and get an image that is right first time.

Hope I explained that right

Ta

Sie

 

[SDK^]

I only shoot 1 RAW file and use the Batch processing function in Photomatix to generate the HDR file.

 

[MattEg]

For the perfect shot, you should be using neutral density filters.

Take a metre reading of terra firma, and one of the sky.
Calculate the difference in stops, then use an ND filter one stop less
to stop down the sky.

 

[petemc]

I only shoot 1 RAW file and use the Batch processing function in Photomatix to generate the HDR file.

Oh no no no. Baaaaad feature. I've just got the latest version, 2.3.x and while you can open a HDR now from the File / Open menu its not to be trusted. The sky was still blown out. You really do need to generate 3 TIFF's from one RAW.

 

[dod]

For the perfect shot, you should be using neutral density filters.

Bingo Well, graduated anyway, not necessarily ND but I know what you meant.

 

[SDK^]

Oh no no no. Baaaaad feature. I've just got the latest version, 2.3.x and while you can open a HDR now from the File / Open menu its not to be trusted. The sky was still blown out. You really do need to generate 3 TIFF's from one RAW.

I'm not sure what you mean

Just for clarity – In Photomatix I goto the batch Processing window, choose the Raw file I want to convert, select the HDR settings and click convert and it saves either a JPEG or TIF (Depending on options selected) and HDR file.
The JPEG file can then be opened in Photoshop to reduce noise, increase saturation, sharpen etc

So I don’t ever use the File – Open menu in Photomatix

Also, I’ve generally noticed that I get better results from the batch processing method over the convert 3 files yourself process.

 

[Arkady]

Shoot RAW and bracket a bit to give the most options later on.