Reading mode: Light Dark

Bracket - do you anymore?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jam
  • Start date Start date
Go to last post
J

Jam

Guest
When I started in photography everyone kept telling me I needed to bracket every shot.

I continue to do this....

However - with the advancement in technology with Digital and RAW, do I need to bracket anymore?

Why do I ask --- It takes up a lot of disk space when I'm traveling. If I didn't bracket I wouldn't need to bring as many backup drives.

On my last trip I used a Canon 1ds III, took about 5,000 different images (multiply by 3 for bracketing and you get 15,000 images). I always take Raw + Large JPG and you start to rack up the diskspace. I will NOT delete an image until I return back home on my home machine.

I don't recall exactly but I returned home with something like 150GB of data and I was on the edge of running out of space. I'd like to up my drive space but that will start to incur additional costs. --- Also, In this approach I can only get something like 150ish (different) images per 16gb card so I need to bring multiple cards with me when I walk around

If my numbers don't add up then please know I'm doing this from memory, Don't focus on the calculations - I really want to know if others are using bracketing

Thanks for the help

Jam
 
The real question is do you end up using the normal exposure or one of the + or - exposures? If you're not using the + or - exposures why bother? I tend to use exposure compensation if I think I need it after making a normal exposure and looking at histogram or seeing blinkies in the lcd.
 
No, I don't bracket since I stopped using transparency film. Digital has been a great time saver, as well as money saver.
 
Jam said:
When I started in photography everyone kept telling me I needed to bracket every shot.
Click to expand...
Interesting. When I started people told me to learn how to get the exposure right all the time. I learned to use a dedicated light meter and how to guesstimate the light and have not looked back since (not being sarcastic here, just the facts). Also I would not have had the money to "waste" two film frames for every keeper. Getting it right from the start still works very well for me - even if the digital camera light meters are not up to the standards of my old film cameras RAW saves the day - every time.

BTW suggest you consider not shooting RAW and JPG if you're bringing home every photo anyway. I only shoot RAW+jpg when I need to upload pictures to the web immediately afterwards.

Good luck!
 
For me, I'll bracket only if the dynamic range of a scene exceeds that of my sensor. I'll bracket "manually" by exposing for the sky, then for shadows, etc. Sometimes, if a scene is absolutely photogenic, like a spectacular sunset, I'll use automatic bracketing, usually towards the minus rather than the plus. Measuring light is an art, and it's sometimes difficult to choose between "spot", "average" and all the methods of measuring exposure. Practice here is key.

As far as shooting RAW + JPEG simultanuously, that's really useless, unless the client is sitting beside you and wants to see "proofs" right away. Just shoot RAW.

As a final comment, I'd say that a sniper is far more effective than a rifle in auto mode. What I'm trying to say is: think, plan, breathe before each shot (unless you're shooting sports). Rather than machine-gunning shots, try to take one that's been well thought out. Remember the film days when film expenses were always lurking in the back of our minds? Take a pic, analyse it on your camera LCD...

I have to say I also went through a period when I was permanently on "auto bracketing". It made me lazy and careless.

Have a great day !!
 
You got the wrong advice from the beginning. People who bracket every shot don't understand their camera and are apparently unwilling to learn. Any modern camera will take perfectly exposed pictures most of the time. You should learn to understand why the camera will fail in some situations (like shooting in the snow) and learn how to correct for that. Bracketing is hardly ever necessary.

--
Johan
http://www.johanfoto.com
 
Jam said:
I always take Raw + Large JPG and you start to rack up the diskspace.
Click to expand...
No wonder your harddisk is full.

You dont need Jpeg when shooting Raw.
DPP will make it the same as your camera output.
 
Jam said:
When I started in photography everyone kept telling me I needed to bracket every shot.

I continue to do this....

However - with the advancement in technology with Digital and RAW, do I need to bracket anymore?
Click to expand...
Did you ever check to see if bracketing was useful or needed?
Member said:
Why do I ask --- It takes up a lot of disk space when I'm traveling. If I didn't bracket I wouldn't need to bring as many backup drives.

On my last trip I used a Canon 1ds III, took about 5,000 different images (multiply by 3 for bracketing and you get 15,000 images). I always take Raw + Large JPG and you start to rack up the diskspace. I will NOT delete an image until I return back home on my home machine.

I don't recall exactly but I returned home with something like 150GB of data and I was on the edge of running out of space.
Click to expand...
15000 RAW + JPG does not take up 150GB of space. It's more like 50GB.

However I don't understand that you consistently bracket all shots. Almost all advice on digital photography will tell you to know your light meter and check the histogram so you don't need bracketing most of the time.

When the light is difficult and you do not have time for checking histograms the bracketing can be useful to either blend multiple shots into one picture or choose the best exposure for RAW conversion. But in most situations bracketing is not needed.

I don't understand why you also shoot JPG's consistently. Do you first check if the JPG can be used and only if not use the RAW file?

--
Kind regards,
Hans Kruse
Home Page -- http://www.hanskrusephotography.com , http://www.hanskruse.com
Workshops -- http://www.hanskrusephotography.com/workshops

Facebook Photography http://www.facebook.com/pages/Hans-Kruse-Photography/271477435625
Workshop Newsletter signup http://eepurl.com/bA0Pj
 
I've never bracketed as a matter of course; with an understanding of the dynamic range of your medium and a good spot meter you don't need to bracket - ever. If you set the style settings appropriately you'll see a review histogram that's relatively close to what you'll be dealing with during RAW processing.

I'm not into the look of paintings of Elvis on velvet and so don't really do the HDR thing - that would be about the only time you'd need bracketed exposures.

I can't see the point of capturing a JPG at the same time as a RAW for my style of shooting, I'm much more likely to create a broadly applicable set of conversion settings and apply them in batch once I'm home if I need to quickly populate an online gallery of shots.

Then there's the final thought: what percentage of shots do you do anything with? The best skill you can develop is the critical eye applied at the time of exposure, so you don't even bother taking shots that you won't use. If I'm shooting sports, which I do occasionally, I will delete shots in the field - there's no point keeping images that don't capture the subject or with severe focus issues.

Kevin
 
KCampbell said:
I've never bracketed as a matter of course; with an understanding of the dynamic range of your medium and a good spot meter you don't need to bracket - ever. If you set the style settings appropriately you'll see a review histogram that's relatively close to what you'll be dealing with during RAW processing.
Click to expand...
That's more or less true. When you have a high dynamic scene and you would like to exploit the maximum DR you need to slightly overexpose and from my experience it is impossible to judge from the histogram on the camera how much you can recover in the RAW conversion without color shifts etc. Therefore I often in such a situation bracket by one stop and take 3 pictures. In Lightroom I will select the one that is optimal and delete the others when I'm sure I will not use them. But if it is a really good shot I will often keep them all for potential later use. In some cases I will use the highest exposed with the lowest exposed and blend them as layers in Photoshop (not HDR).

--
Kind regards,
Hans Kruse
Home Page -- http://www.hanskrusephotography.com , http://www.hanskruse.com
Workshops -- http://www.hanskrusephotography.com/workshops

Facebook Photography http://www.facebook.com/pages/Hans-Kruse-Photography/271477435625
Workshop Newsletter signup http://eepurl.com/bA0Pj
 
The only times I bracket are (1) when I am doing a commercial shoot and need to get it right or (2) when I have a great shot under difficult lighting conditions.
--
Jim
http://www.pbase.com/jcassatt
 
There are tricky exposure situations where bracketing is warranted and others (most?) where it is simply not necessary, especially given the small (...but still significant...) latitude allowed by current Raw files.

As you become familiar with your camera and its exposure modes and internal logic, you will confidently and almost instinctively recognize when it might be useful to use bracketing.

Hope this helps!

PK
--
“Loose praise may feed my ego but constructive criticism advances my skills”
************************************************************
-------------------------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/photokhan
(PBase Supporter)
 
I only bracket if it is a tricky exposure or if I intend to blend expsoures in post. I only shoot raw, unless there a quick turn around is needed, then I shoot RAW plus jpeg. If the jpeg is good I am done.
--
http://mitchseaver.com/
 
Hi:

I like to shot three rapid exposures when I have my 5D2 on a tripod, e.g. a landscape shot. Typically using Av for depth of field control.

I set the bracketing to what I want (e.g. + - 1 stop), then set the 2 sec. timer, then use live view. Pressing the shutter button once fires off three rapid shots with the mirror up.

Makes for a nice HDR set.

Don't need to use the Mirror Lockup function at all.

--
Peter
'We humans are privileged to be the eyes of the universe'
 
Back in the days of film and a shot was important, it was considered standard procedure to bracket those shots.. You would never consider bringing home 5000 shots though..... or even 500 most of the time, unless absolutely necessary. That would be hundreds/thousands of dollars in processing and film costs.

Digital has changed many things.. Probably bracketing would fall into that category. Most software will give you an over or underexposed shot without a need for using that extra storage. A quick histogram check may tell you if you have any blown highlights etc... So, I would say that, no, I do not bracket nearly as much as I did when shooting film, but I do take way more exposures than I did then..

I would agree with most.. RAW +JPEG is unnecessary and only makes sense if you are running two cards and the JPEG is a back-up or for immediate use..
 
i usually bracket 7 shots.

so whats the problem with disk space? I use 2 fw800 500gb 2.5" g-tech disk packs (shortly to be upgraded to 750gb disks).. disks cost hardly anything these days, so storage is never going to be an issue.

never really seen the point in shooting raw+large jpg, I only ever shoot raw and small jpg to use as index
 
pete zeugma said:
disks cost hardly anything these days, so storage is never going to be an issue.
Click to expand...
Storage is an issue for me.

I have 10 TB (5x2 TB with two working as backup) - and I'll be out of space some time this summer. Next disk size is 3TB - and 5 of those cost around 1,000 USD, and that will only provide temporary relief.

I would really prefer upgrading to 4Tb disks - if they made them - as my case will not allow for more than 6 disks.
 
Shooting professionally architecture and interiors I do it more now than ever for HDR....Almost name of the game these days.
 
dont even get me started on raids... and stupidly I am considering moving upto MF digital, a whole order of magnitude increase in file sizes
 
Sports/Wildlife - No (usually no time anyway)

Normal shooting (whatever that is)- rarely (although I will re-shoot if the histogram is off)
Awkward light -- yes if possible
On tripod -- Always -- Makes HDR a possibility.

I just shoot RAW as I can't see the point in taking up card/disk space with the jpgs

Steven
--
Gallery - http://www.pbase.com/stelin29
Equipment List on Profile
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top