Blown Highlights at NFL Game - What am I doing wrong?

About a month ago I purchased my 1st DSLR (K100D) and since then have been reading up on aperture, shutter speed, etc...but I obviously still have a lot to learn.

Yesterday, I took my K100D and my DA 50-200mm to an NFL game (well, it wasn't much of a game, but that's another story...). hoping to get some good pics of the game. Although I took a good number of keepers, I was surprised when I got home how many had blown highlights -

http://www.pbase.com/faharsla/image/70484819

http://www.pbase.com/faharsla/image/70484919

http://www.pbase.com/faharsla/image/70485201

I'm not exactly sure where I messed up. Obviously they are overexposed but I'm not sure why? I adjusted aperture and shutter speed so that the viewfinder displayed "0.0" for my exposure compensation. I would assume that would mean that my pictures would turn out with the proper exposure (neither over nor under exposed).

I was using Multi-Segement metering. Should I have used Center or Spot in this situation? Could this possibly be a potential problem with my K100D?

This forum has always been of great help. Any suggestions would be really appreciated.

Well, first you were focusing on the wrong team )).
Sorry, couldn't resist.

Your exif shows you were in manual mode. It looks like you are about 2 stops over, shutter speed should have been closer to 1/200 or 1/250.
--
Rosco
Terminal Stage LBA
http://www.pbase.com/roscot

Try using spot or center weighted metering when using telephoto. This may give a more accurate metering. I also use spot/cw for theater/stage shots.
Nols
--

“…you can see the whole world in a square mile if you knew where to look” – Dean Koontz in Life Expectancy

I'll wait for someone who is more knowledgeable than me to explain it. But if your exposure meter in the viewfinder read 0.0, then can it be because of the grass? If the grass is darker than midtone, then the camera will overexpose it, especially when you're in matrix metering.

I agree a faster shutter speed was called for. Also, in bright sunlight you were shooting ISO 400. I would have gone 200, but that's ccol.
This was a case where checking the histogram would have been invaluable.

I looked at one of the images, and the histogram was pushed right and was clipping off the top. That means overexposure and more signal than the camera was able to process.

You were shooting Manual, I would have gone Av or Tv, but that's a personal thing.

I can't stress enough the importance of the histogram. You may already know how to read it, but if not, checking it would have allowed you to correct on the fly.

That being said, the Packers really laid an egg on Sunday. Sorry.
--
'Dinsdale?'



http://www.pbase.com/camtrav

I know others here will be able to help you, lots of good folks check in here. I did note that the iso was 400; I would think that iso 200 would be better. Was the camera on manual or auto iso mode? Also, I've been to two NFL games this year and was surprised at how much contrast there was on the field. The sun coming in over the edge of the stadium lip was very strong, and made very deep shadows. Maybe in this case the center weighted metering mode would have been best.

Did you get any indication from looking at the LCD display and the histogram screen that the shots were coming out this away?

Hope someone can help you.

Louis

--
Pbase home page: http://www.pbase.com/lwise/

Green grass usually registers or is read by the exposure meter as middle gray. The percentage of grass vs. the white uniforms fools the meter into thinking it needs to be brighter than it really needs to be. You were in bright sun with a lot of reflection and the dynamic range of the camera is not really that great.

In terms of how to expose; there are many tricks. One would be to spot meter on the white uniforms. The general rule is to push the histogram to the right without clipping or to do adjust to avoid the blinkies. I find that I ususally have to set my exposure to +.7 for most conditions and most lenses. That is just for me, my camera, and my lenses. You have to experiment with your own set up to see if you need exposure compensation or not.

When you are shooting sport, you usually want to shoot at fairly high speed which in bright sun is not a problem. If it is so bright that you are still burning out parts of the image, you might consider a neutral density ND filter.

The joy of digital is the instant feedback you get and the ability to quickly adjust your exposure to compensate when the initial settings are not working.

If you shoot RAW, there are only three settings that matter. Speed, Aperture, and ISO.

Get out in conditions similar to the bright football field when you do not need to worry about the pressure of capturing shots and experiment. Read up on histograms so they can be of assistance.

Hope this helps a little.

Be well,

AZ
--

'There is an art, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw
yourself at the ground and miss.'Douglas Adams'



Its a start: http://www.pbase.com/frumsimchasphoto

the pics do not have blown highlights, they are just plain overexposed. why are you in manual, you just got done explaining that you are new to dslr and the k100d?

put it in auto and let the camera set the exposure till you are more familiar with what you are doing. you bought a full auto high tech camera, let it work for you. THEN after you see what it can do, start experimenting.

set iso first then let camera go in full auto. for day shots try iso200. for night or in dome use iso800 and check shutter speed(if 1/125 or higher ok, if not go to iso1600) leave camera in full auto. do not concern yourself with fstop, at profootball game distances even a fairly wide open fstop will work. the idea is to get good pics. later, if you are noticing what the camera is picking for fstop and shutter speed, you can use these as starting points and adjust. however remember to adjust both fstop and shutter speed to get the same EV or your shots will go light or darker.

good luck with your new purchase. gary

Ouch. That hurt. I'm still reeling from the game, be easy on me.

OK, I know I'm overexposed but my viewfinder was reading "0.0" (or close to). Not 2 stops over. Should I have had the camera exposure metering in a different mode and taken a reading from something specific as oppossed to using Multi-Segemented?

Excuse my "newness". My camera skills are about as good as the Packers football skills (yesterday)......

camperguy01 said:

I'm not exactly sure where I messed up. Obviously they are
overexposed but I'm not sure why?

Click to expand...

Overexposed, you are right. Blown highlights look different.

camperguy01 said:

I adjusted aperture and shutter speed so that the viewfinder
displayed "0.0" for my exposure compensation.

Click to expand...

So far so good. I assume you have used M mode (as someone have said EXIF indicates that).

camperguy01 said:

I would assume that would mean that my pictures would turn out
with the proper exposure (neither over nor under exposed).

Click to expand...

Not always -- it works only if it reads 0.0 AND if metered from a mid gray area. Reading 0.0 from a bright area results in underexposure, while 0.0 from a dark area results in overexposure. Reading 0.0 in fact means: "render area I am metering from as mid-gray".

camperguy01 said:

I was using Multi-Segement metering. Should I have used Center or
Spot in this situation?

Click to expand...

Yes. You should have used spot, metered from the grass to read 0.0 and all would have been just perfect!

One more thing: in M mode you have to recheck reading for almost every shot. Our eyes automatically compensate for any change in light intensity (thin clouds passing overhead for example) but your camera stays with Av and Tv locked in M mode and records all those changes. That could have been the problem as well: perhaps you have metered with a bit less light available, then took those shots 5 or 10 minutes later in brighter light, resulting in overexposure.

camperguy01 said:

Could this possibly be a potential problem with my K100D?

Click to expand...

No, metering mode combined with shooting mode was the problem.

-= IVAN =-

but I don't think I ever saw a "A" type lens overexpose that much in any metering mode. Your at least a full stop over what the camera would "average" in a situation like that. If you got some that were good and some that look like the one's you posted and all were shot "manual metering" and you are "0"-ing out the exposure I rhink you may have a sticky aperature on the lens. At least that is one possibility. Anyway no matter how I look at it it's just not normal...
BTW: The game was real bad.... but at least you got a day at Lambeau

--
360 minutes from the prime meridian. (-5375min, 3.55sec) 1093' above sea level.

'The exposure meter is calibrated to some clearly defined standards and the user needs to adjust his working method and his subject matter to these values. It does not help to suppose all kinds of assumptions that do not exist.'
Erwin Puts

set your shutter and see what happens.

Based on the harsh light you might have been better off using centerweighted, meter off of Brett.

Of course I never use manual, seems that aperture is easier to use and you can chimp and adjust ev+- as needed.

Manual can be a lot of work if you're not experienced.

Also, open the lens up a little. No need to use F11 or F13 from that distance, IMO.

A, F6.7 or so, ISO 200, lte the camera do the rest and enjoy the game.

Gene

quite complicated machinery.

First advice - USE YOUR HISTOGRAM. THAT'S WHY ITS THERE.

See on luminous-landscape.com for a good description of how to read and what it means.

Now - what you want is a meter reading which says everything is OK...which produces a histogram which is normal. If you have Breezebrowser or similar program download the images in the Pentax reps recent post of his first shots with his production K10D. I checked these histograms in Breezebrowser, and, as he claims, they are perfect. So are his images - visually perfect.

It is not unusual to have to enter a correction (+ or -) a bit in a special situation (the beach, a very high-contrast image, a very low contrast image, backlighting, etc...but normally it should not be necessary.

But except in situations where you are very rushed - and a football game is a good example of a situation where you have PLENTY of time to check exposure - check that the meter is giving you a reading which produces a correct histogram as well as a visually pleasing image on the LCD. Once you have established an exposure reading which produces the good image/histogram at the ball game, as long as the weather does not change radically, it will stay the same.

THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE THESE TOOLS. To get good results you simply MUST learn to use them. READ THE MANUAL. LEARN HOW TO READ AND USE THE HISTOGRAM.

Incidentally - if you MUST risk bad exposure UNDEREXPOSURE is FAR FAR BETTER THAN OVEREXPOSURE. With overexposure there is nothing there to change. With underexposure (too dark an image) there are many ways possible to save it.

But correct exposure should always be your goal.

In the early days don't be afraid to use one of the auto settings. Nothing to be ashamed of and about 80% of the time it will be satisfactory.

Note in problem situations you can bracket and/or use RAW. Buy an extra card if you shoot a lot - and maybe an extra battery. Extra images are essentially free in digital so shoot a lot and throw away the bad ones.

Ever read National Geographic ? Great pictures, huh ? They are famous for some of the best photography, and best and highest paid photographers in the world.

But a shoot producing say, 20 to 25 images will usually be edited down from 3000 EXPOSURES. Yep, three thousand. A "keeper" rate of about 8 in 1000. So don't let anybody tell you "overshooting" is "unphotographic"....

And when your'e shooting friends or kids or family always shoot bursts. Shoot LOTS and LOTS. In your first pass on postprocessing, throw away about 80% of the images. Then edit out the good ones from what's left. NEVER SHOW ANYBODY A BAD OR UNFLATTERING IAMGE. NEVER KEEP A BAD OR UNFLATTERING IMAGE.

If you do this, in six months family and friends will think you are the greatest photographer they ever met. Trust me on this. NEVER SHOW A BAD OR UNFLATTERING IMAGE. OVERSHOOT by a factor of at least 10.

Good luck its a great hobby.

--
God bless all here - rennie12

I can always count on this forum for excellent help. Thanks much for all the replies.

Based on the comments I'm reading it sounds like I need to learn my histogram and maybe adjust my metering options. Trying to view the LCD in bright light was pretty difficult.

As to why I'm using manual mode. I've been reading Peterson's book "Understanding Exposure". He reccommends using manual mode to help get a better understanding of exposure. It really doesn't bother me that half the pics didn't turn out. At this point I'm more concerned with learning than getting perfect pictures. Using this mode is helping me (slowly but surely).

Thanks again for all replies - appreciate it much.

My advice when learning the camera is to try lots of stuff, especially in a situation like the football game where not a lot is riding on getting great shots. Shoot underexposed, shoot overexposed, shoot low aperture, shoot high aperture. Try Tv mode, try Av mode, try P and try Auto. Since getting my K100 my wife has found it humorous that when I go to take a picture, I end of taking 5 pictures of the same thing with different settings. That's the only way to find out what really works in getting the best shot.

In this case, auto-exposure in cameras is a tricky business. As other people have recommended it's best to check your results and adjust. Since judging the exposure of the shots by looking at them in the LCD when you're outdoors is difficult, learning to know what a correctly exposed histogram looks like helps immensely.

Good luck and have fun.

I found the matrix metering on the Ds to be unusably psychotic, because it produced results just like you're showing. I'm not sure if it has been improved on the K100, but from your input, it seems not. Spot and CW work better - though not well enough to not have to check the histogram frequently. In bright sun like that I'll typically just underexpose by 2/3 stop or so, and shoot worry free and make up the work in post. At ISO 200, pushing a bit is no big deal, and it gives you a lot of flexibility on how you want your highlights to actually look in the end.

Recent info also shows that using manual WB might keep the red channel from clipping nearly as early, but I have yet to test this in a practical situation, as I just read about it today.

I think your only error here is not being aware of a serious limitation of the equipment your using.

(P.S. - I will state that other folks claim to have cameras that have faultless metering, so there is no need to inform me of this again.)

Shooting digital reminds me of shooting slides... Slightly underexposed... OK. Slightly overexposed... Bad.

Do what the wedding photographers do. Shoot, check histogram, adjust/compensate exposure if nessary, shoot... repeat. Most of my first shots at a shoot don't even make it out of the camera. Along with on the fly sensitivity and pp white balance adjust, being able to check the work in the field is a grea advantage!

I don't think anyone mentioned the "sunny 16" rule. That guideline for exposure says that subjects in direct sun can be properly exposed if you set the aperture at f16 and the shutter to the inverse of the film speed. Notice I said film speed. It works well with film, but my limited experience suggests it's not spot on with digital. Close, but not perfect. By the sunny 16 rule, your 1/125 and f11 with ISO 400 puts you about 2.5 stops overexposed. As for why your meter indicated "correct" exposure (0.0 meaning not too much and not too little), I couldn't say. If you were in spot mode and happened to hover over a shadow or dark tone, that might explain it, but it's unlikely that would happen on repeated exposures unless you're never moving the camera and the dark tones are stationary.
Stu

I don't have the pics anywhere up right now, but I was at the packers-cards game a few weeks earlier and took a bunch of pics. My fz-20 (my k10 wasn't in yet) was mostly set to auto mode or the sports mode (or shutter pri mode at a high shutter speed), and it chose f/4 and about 1/500s. The pic came out very nice, with very little blown areas.

Got to see farve do the lambeau leap....
--
K10D/Sigma 17-70/Tamron 70-300

Sunny 16 is a good sense check, but its not infallible if there are white shirts around!! Also on APS cameras F16 is starting to show diffraction softness.

The old "sports photog" trick was to set up in Tv mode at 1/200 or so (to freeze the action) then spot meter off the grass and note the aperture. Then spot meter of the players (white shirts) and note the aperture. The meter is measuring both at median grey which is too light for grass (possibly why your shots are overexposed) and too dark for a white shirt, so pick the half way point and shoot away in manual (in a well lit scene the overall metering will not change much).

Of course with digital once you have taken a few shots you can check for blinking highlights or a distorted histogram (bunched left or right) and adjust the aperture accordingly till it looks OK.

As the sun does move you may want to check every 20 minutes or so and adjust if necessary. On a floodlit pitch you can generally shoot all night on the same exposure.

lownine said:

I don't think anyone mentioned the "sunny 16" rule. That guideline
for exposure says that subjects in direct sun can be properly
exposed if you set the aperture at f16 and the shutter to the
inverse of the film speed. Notice I said film speed. It works
well with film, but my limited experience suggests it's not spot on
with digital. Close, but not perfect. By the sunny 16 rule, your
1/125 and f11 with ISO 400 puts you about 2.5 stops overexposed.
As for why your meter indicated "correct" exposure (0.0 meaning not
too much and not too little), I couldn't say. If you were in spot
mode and happened to hover over a shadow or dark tone, that might
explain it, but it's unlikely that would happen on repeated
exposures unless you're never moving the camera and the dark tones
are stationary.
Stu

Click to expand...

--
Steve
Measurebating makes you short sighted.
http://www.pbase.com/steve_jacob