shadow or light?

ArtphotoasiA

ArtphotoasiA

Suspended / Banned
Messages
269
Edit My Images
No
Hi guys....

I actually have a doubt quite important... and I got different answers.

As you all have more experience with digital photography than I do, I wonder which is better between 2 ways in case of a difficult light in photography.

1) Try to underexpose a little the photo so that all the highlights in the picture are safe and not burned.... but the shadows will be too black.

2) Try to overexpose a little so that the shadows will be transparent but the highlights will be white.

I read someone saying that case 2 is a better way to reduce the noise particularly in the shadows... so must pursuit....

I read someone saying that case 1 is better because the highlight once is gone are gone and can not recover the details inside...

What you think?
 
Much easier to correct under exposed areas - blown highlights are gone forever so I tend to keep hold of 'dark' images to review at home.
 
black shadows always look like more real than holes in the sky
i mean the most situations, but not all :nono:
:wave:
 
You can light into shadows to reduce them (flash, reflactors) but once you reach 256 on the scale it is gone forever.

Shadows are powerful tools too - they give shape to things.
 
Depends on the dynamic range of the scene Vs. the dynamic range of your film or sensor. If you are within the range, just expose it perfectly

If you are trying to squeeze a bot more out of the scene, generally I would expose to the right.

Things to consider

1. noise in the shadows. If you under expose, and then push the processing, you can end up with lots of noise in the shadows, and dark tones. This is very film/camera dependsnt
2. recovering a highlight can be impossible if you have cooked it too much

so sometimes you have a choice.. which compromise do you want - depends on the subject and camera / film

The next thing to remember is how the camera meters... they generally meter assuming a mid grey. this can sometimes confuse you or he camera into metering a scene wrong. If you are pushing a exposure you need to know your starting point exactly. in other words, you may need a grey card and a light meter
 
I was brought up on the phrase 'Expose for the highlights, develop for the shadows' but I fear with digital noise increase being more apparent in shadows that have been boosted, it's not so clear cut.

My maxim is get it right (or as close to right) as you can in-camera. Processing is great, and you can have some fun and create some really interesting stuff in the computer, but relying on the computer to save a shot every time isn't ideal.

One thing I don't like is recovered highlights that are blown; they look horrid and I'd rather have a correctly exposed highlight I(it can have some clipping in it - it's not a crime!!) than be worried about a bit of excess croma noise in the blacks.
 
technically always shoot to the right but don't clip, creatively do what you dam well like if you think its going to add something to the picture
 
specialman said:
Processing is great, and you can have some fun and create some really interesting stuff in the computer, but relying on the computer to save a shot every time isn't ideal.
Click to expand...

This for sure look quite wise to me....

Braketing I noted that already on the LCD screen (not on pc) i prefer -1 stop ... specially if there are some strong light in some zone of the photo.
I need to see the LCD in good conditions like in house or hotel room or anyway not with daylight.
During a trip this is my first level selection.
 
Hi guys!!

I started today my big 'lightroom' job of about 2000 pic 200 will survive I guess. Will see.
I know I'm newby but I was litterly AMAZED and loved the software the raw flessibility.... what is possible to do with raw files of my canon 450 can not immagine before....
You can get so perfect images and recover a lot, really a lot... also severely overexposed shot... unless are really really burned out!!

Can not even compare with photoshop and jpg elaboration I was used before working on films and scanning.

Quality of 12mpx shot
Quality and flessibility of raw files
Quality and controll of the elaboration in Lightroom

Can not ask more really.... when I will finish to set my new workflow I will go on like a mad!
 
Was an article in one of the photomagazines recenty about this (can't remember which one off the top of my head but could probably dig it out if you are interested). May not word this quite right technically but essentially, from memory, it was advocating exposing to the right. Apparently, it said:
-sensors can detect far more degrees of light/tones per pixel as you move to the right of the histogram, so if you bias to the right you will get more tones/information
-apparently histograms on cameras are done from JPEGs or something of the like so don't necessarily show accurately when you are overexposing - may show you as burning out but actually in raw the informaion is there - article explained how to check this, think it involved shooting with no extra settings or something and comparing
-obviously if you burn it out, you can't get it back:|

I found this all interesting, because I always feared the dreaded highlights in the sky and thought as someone mentioned, you are better to have more shadows where you can 'rescue' detail.

Isn't there an SLR camera which boasts to have a significantly better dynamic range which can help, LUMIX or something?

And there's always HDR if you an be bothered...

G.
 
I always tend to underexpose slightly & prefer to bring up the levels a little in PS.:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top