-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
CC please :)
- Thread starter edge0627
- Start date
John Deerfield
Senior Member
It might help to know the context of why these pictures were taken. Since this is the beginners forum, I will assume that these are snapshots for fun and try to critique accordingly...
Overall, the shots are definitely over-exposed, by about 2/3rds of a stop (maybe a bit more on the first two), so dialing in negative exposure compensation would have been beneficial. One way to tell you are over-exposed is too simply look at the left side of the histogram where the blacks are: you have none! I am quite certain with this lighting that you should have black somewhere in these images! Really, in terms of snapshots, that is my only real critique: a bit over-exposed. Learn to read the histogram and get out of the auto mode!
It doesn't look like there was too much thought put into the lighting? It kind of is what it is so to speak. The characteristics of light are: quality, direction, color, and intensity. Did you consider these characteristics before pressing the shutter button? It's fine if you didn't, but then strange to ask for a critique of it.
According to the EXIF data, these were shot in auto? Which simply means that if you didn't like a setting, you wouldn't be able to change it anyway? Most cameras don't even allow access to exposure compensation in the auto mode, you need to at least be in the Program mode. So again, seems strange to ask for a critique on settings if you weren't concerned with changing them anyway? Then again, perhaps my EXIF is reading the metadata wrong.
Overall, the shots are definitely over-exposed, by about 2/3rds of a stop (maybe a bit more on the first two), so dialing in negative exposure compensation would have been beneficial. One way to tell you are over-exposed is too simply look at the left side of the histogram where the blacks are: you have none! I am quite certain with this lighting that you should have black somewhere in these images! Really, in terms of snapshots, that is my only real critique: a bit over-exposed. Learn to read the histogram and get out of the auto mode!
trekkeruss
Senior Member
Agreed. I would add that you can see some motion blur in #2; a different mode would have taken care of that. The focus point in #3 is on the football instead of the boy's face.
ChrisLumix
Senior Member
I agree that these shots are over-exposed - what form of metering did you select? #3 you needed to expose for the highlights on the boy's face (spot metering) OR select HDR (Intelligent Exposure) mode to equalise the highlights and shadows.
I would add that shots #1 and #3 looked posed (not that there is anything wrong with taking posed pictures! but they would classify more as 'snaps'). The second shot is a nice piece of action, quite well captured.
--
Panas0n!c Lum!x FZ-38
I would add that shots #1 and #3 looked posed (not that there is anything wrong with taking posed pictures! but they would classify more as 'snaps'). The second shot is a nice piece of action, quite well captured.
--
Panas0n!c Lum!x FZ-38
Why ?
Two out of the three photos are stationary so what made you think "It's important to maintain a shutter speed of 1/160 let me set it to Tv" ? The one shot where shutter priority would be important has a shutter setting that's too low (1/125).
Port Royal Dad
Senior Member
From what I can see about the ambient lighting, it was a bright sunny day. The lighting on the boy (foreground) is the same as the ambient lighting in the background. Essentially, the lighting between the foreground and the background was even. This makes for very flat looking photos, without any dimensionality. You've probably heard folks saying, "Why don't my photos have that POP to them?" Well, just like with your examples, it's all about the lighting.
Adding that dimensionality...that POP is easy enough to do. And it's done with off camera lighting, like a speedlight in the hotshoe or on a bracket, or better yet, completely off camera, and mounted on a stand.
It is perfectly acceptable to use your flash during the day time hours.
I would have approached the shots like this. Seeing that the lighting was even between the foreground and the background, I would have used the camera’s meter and metered the ambient light, and then dial the exposure down 2/3 of a stop. Then using my 580EX speedlight in the hotshoe, used it as fill lighting for the boy in the foreground.
Think of your photos as having two very distinct exposures, and expose for them separately:
Foreground Exposure: Bare 580EX Flash, ETTL, FEC +1
It's an easy lighting concept to apply. Practice it, and then use it outdoors on sunny days, cloudy days, or sunrise/sunsets.
Regards, Mike
--
B.R.A.S.S. (Breathe, Relax, Aim, Sight, Squeeze)
Adding that dimensionality...that POP is easy enough to do. And it's done with off camera lighting, like a speedlight in the hotshoe or on a bracket, or better yet, completely off camera, and mounted on a stand.
It is perfectly acceptable to use your flash during the day time hours.
I would have approached the shots like this. Seeing that the lighting was even between the foreground and the background, I would have used the camera’s meter and metered the ambient light, and then dial the exposure down 2/3 of a stop. Then using my 580EX speedlight in the hotshoe, used it as fill lighting for the boy in the foreground.
Think of your photos as having two very distinct exposures, and expose for them separately:
- Foreground: Use your flash
- Background: Meter via shutter, aperture and ISO
Foreground Exposure: Bare 580EX Flash, ETTL, FEC +1
It's an easy lighting concept to apply. Practice it, and then use it outdoors on sunny days, cloudy days, or sunrise/sunsets.
Regards, Mike
--
B.R.A.S.S. (Breathe, Relax, Aim, Sight, Squeeze)
These are charming pictures, and I hope your friend was happy with them. I don't find them overexposed, since the green grass appears appropriately mid-toned on two of them, and you get good detail in the shadowed face and clothing of the one where the subject is sitting on the bridge.
Since these are all at ISO 100, you must not have been using the Highlight Tone Priority feature (which I believe makes ISO 200 the minimum setting). Have you experimented with this to see if it's effective in protecting highlights a bit under contrasty conditions? It might have helped with the sunlit portion of the subject's fair skin and the top of the wood railing.
See page 156 of your owner's manual. It's in the custom function settings, C.FN-5. "0" is disabled; "1" is enabled. It's supposed to extend the highlight dynamic range of your shots. I haven't owned a Canon with this feature, and would be interested to hear whether you find it effective or not.
http://gdlp01.c-wss.com/gds/3/0300000933/01/EOSRXSi-EOS450D_EN.pdf
John Deerfield
Senior Member
It is better to understand how exposure works. Both shutter priority and aperture priority have their place in the world, but understanding how it all works is far more important. Most portrait photographers would have chosen aperture priority (or better yet, manual!) so that they could control the aperture and thus control the DoF.
Regardless of the shooting and/or metering mode, the shots are over exposed. You need to learn to see this and not take our word for it. Otherwise someone might come along and say they are just fine, when they are not. The right side of you histogram is flush. This alone isn't a "written in stone" sign that you are over-exposed (unless you are in a more controlled environment in which case flush to the right is a definite sign you are over-exposed), but it is certainly a clue. According to the histogram, you have no black values in the image(s). Again, by itself, not a sure sign of overexposure, but a definite clue. When evaluated against the image, these clues add up. One would think there would be a bit more "black" in the image. A bit more contrast. All told: over-exposed. How you adjust for that (either dialing in negative exposure compensation or shooting manually and making your own adjustments) is up to you. You could use some form of highlight protection, but if you are shooting Raw this isn't advised (the histogram won't be showing you the Raw file).
I am not so sure I would throw flash into the mix quite yet. I say this because flash could be used as a way to not learn about lighting, thinking the flash will potentially "solve" lighting issues. When actually, learning to use flash will be easier if you learn about lighting in general. Lets take the boy on the bridge. What is your light source? What is its direction? What is the quality? Recognizing this, what can you do to make the most of it? Thinking out loud: what if you turn the subject more to our left so that the sun rims both shoulders, not just the left shoulder. Maybe have him put his hands on the rail above (getting his hands out of the direct light from the camera position) and have him lean forward just a bit. This should give us even lighting on our subject, with a decent rim light. Leaning forward should "shade" his legs so that we don't have a strong slice of sun coming over the legs. And finally, perhaps set the white balance to daylight, or possibly cloudy to warm it up a bit. Bottom line though is to know and understand lighting so you can work with what you have.
That's some really good avice John.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum