Reading mode: Light Dark

Wrong settings, right moment......

Go to last post
ngtszhodavid

ngtszhodavid

Leading Member
Messages
653
Reaction score
86
Location
HK
Often times I find myself dialing in the wrong settings (mostly too wide of aperture, sometimes wrong ISO, sometimes forgot to switch back not to do bracketing and often times should have moved closer or face more directly with the subject) when taking shots especially with kids and under the sun or travelling

(time constraint, thousand other things to worry about like keeping an eye out on our backpacks, where we need to go next, how much time left, and 'just wanted to get back in the shade asap since it's so hot ;p).

Looking back, sometimes even though i got the settings and technique wrong, I should still be happy able to capture that one moment that means something to me. Often times after I realize I got the setting wrong, it's super hard to replicate or ask my subject (wife and son) to re pose again, as the moment will just be gone.



Feel free to share yours if you wish.



Taken with my D700 (my last trip with the D700)



not sure why i was using F2

not sure why i was using F2



probably should have moved myself to the left, and not sure why i used F2.8 either

probably should have moved myself to the left, and not sure why i used F2.8 either
 
On that first shot, the all-white people in front of the all-white house, there might be more highlight information in there than you think.

Go back to the raw file and capture using the "neutral" setting (NX) or "linear" (C1) profile. The "standard" curve exaggerates the highlights to look more contrasty and pleasing. Sometimes it blows highlights that weren't blown in the raw file. There is sometimes up to a stop of difference, so it's worth a try.
 
ngtszhodavid said:
pcm81 said:
rpps said:
I always shoot RAW and use A mode and try to stick between f 5.6 to f8. When I am asked to shoot a wedding even if I haven't got the exposure right I can always edit in CNX2 and obtain a reasonably good photo which is a great insurance to have on these once in a lifetime events. All I have to do then is mainly is frame the photo. Your photos are still able to be edited and enhanced a bit.

Click to expand...
Nice save

--
1. D800 is the first camera with resolution so high that it simply does not matter.
2. Most people who do not own/shoot d800 misunderstand it. Color depth and accuracy in addition to resolution is what makes d800 great. Resolution alone is over rated.
Click to expand...
thanks! This is interesting as I wonder if it's a cultural difference Or maybe just our personal preference. We tend to prefer lighter color and softer feel for portraits while for westerners maybe prefer sharper more contrast and vivid colors type of feel. I'm likely overgeneralizing a bit but that tends to be my observation so far in this forum. Or maybe it is skintone related as most Asian woman I know of like my wife prefer fairer skin :)
Click to expand...
Truth be told, my edit was not as contrasty on my calibrated monitor in photohop as it is in web browser on dpreview post.



I think that the subject needs to be separated from background either via sharpness, light or color. Often it is easy to overdo color separation resulting in too contrasty of an image

In my opinion the color tone and contrast should be tailored to the subject and the mood the subject supposed to set. A portrait of a woman or a child wold better go with soft contrast, but a portrait of super hero (wonder woman included) or a tough biker dude would go better with high contrast.



--
1. D800 is the first camera with resolution so high that it simply does not matter.
2. Most people who do not own/shoot d800 misunderstand it. Color depth and accuracy in addition to resolution is what makes d800 great. Resolution alone is over rated.
 
Looking on the, overexposed, bright side; they did choose color matching outfits.



b5aa261130544fb39e62ff0f72c5d3b4.jpg




--
1. D800 is the first camera with resolution so high that it simply does not matter.
2. Most people who do not own/shoot d800 misunderstand it. Color depth and accuracy in addition to resolution is what makes d800 great. Resolution alone is over rated.
 
pcm81 said:
Looking on the, overexposed, bright side; they did choose color matching outfits.

b5aa261130544fb39e62ff0f72c5d3b4.jpg


--
1. D800 is the first camera with resolution so high that it simply does not matter.
2. Most people who do not own/shoot d800 misunderstand it. Color depth and accuracy in addition to resolution is what makes d800 great. Resolution alone is over rated.
Click to expand...

Haha.. thanks
 
ShawnHoke said:
Honestly, that first one has that high key look that's all the rage right now. Maybe you were just ahead of the curve and didn't know it. ;-)
Click to expand...
 
I had the lens in M and totally didn't focus. I was at f/8 if I remember right, so it wasn't a disaster.

As soon as I saw the scene, I immediately thought of Saul Leiter, early user of colour and important contributor to the "New York School" that we now know as street photography.

Leiter died in November last year, just a few days short of his 90th birthday.



14128099939_e4e578864d_o_d.jpg




--
It's more important how an image looks as a thumbnail than how it looks at 100%.
 
Just a 2 minute play, defocus background as well...

Ray





66be56bfb42e40aa99b9bd858a9ead9c.jpg




--
VISIT MY WEBSITE HERE...HOPE YOU LIKE
www.flickr.com

Ray Guselli

Explore Ray Guselli’s 2,426 photos on Flickr!
www.flickr.com www.flickr.com
 
Thanks, somehow it looks a bit dark and gloomy ...might be due to my monitor here

thanks for the suggestion though!
 
Last edited:
Luke Kaven said:
ngtszhodavid said:
Thanks, somehow it looks a bit dark and gloomy ...might be due to my monitor here

thanks for the suggestion though!
Click to expand...
Did you have a chance to try what I suggested above?

Luke Kaven wrote:

On that first shot, the all-white people in front of the all-white house, there might be more highlight information in there than you think.

Go back to the raw file and capture using the "neutral" setting (NX) or "linear" (C1) profile. The "standard" curve exaggerates the highlights to look more contrasty and pleasing. Sometimes it blows highlights that weren't blown in the raw file. There is sometimes up to a stop of difference, so it's worth a try.
Click to expand...
Cool thanks for the suggestion

I use LR. is there such profile?
 
ngtszhodavid said:
Luke Kaven said:
ngtszhodavid said:
Thanks, somehow it looks a bit dark and gloomy ...might be due to my monitor here

thanks for the suggestion though!
Click to expand...
Did you have a chance to try what I suggested above?

Luke Kaven wrote:

On that first shot, the all-white people in front of the all-white house, there might be more highlight information in there than you think.

Go back to the raw file and capture using the "neutral" setting (NX) or "linear" (C1) profile. The "standard" curve exaggerates the highlights to look more contrasty and pleasing. Sometimes it blows highlights that weren't blown in the raw file. There is sometimes up to a stop of difference, so it's worth a try.
Click to expand...
Cool thanks for the suggestion

I use LR. is there such profile?
Click to expand...
Yes, it's called either "camera linear" or "camera neutral". These are the cleanest numbers you can get, the closest representation to the true numbers coming off the sensor, without any tonal exaggeration. If there is any highlight headroom, this is where you will see it. I think you will be pleasantly surprised.

The neutral/linear profile is a good place to start for many images.
 
Of course having the right settings is better then not, but IMO especially when shooting people, it's a shame if you don't, but far less important then missing the right moment

Look eg at the famous picture of Robert Capa of Omaha beach on D-day June 6 1944

Loading…

padresteve.files.wordpress.com

out of focus, full of motion blur, and considering the burnt in parts of thebackground probably not exposed properly

And to give a more modern example, Herb Ritts was notorious for the horrible negatives he used to produce, being focused on the picture and totally neglecting the proper technique (for that he employed an excellent darkroom technician to save the shot afterwards)

Having started in the film era (and having spent countless late night nights printing and developing in the darkroom) in my experience digital has made life a lot easier in that regard, so yes, it's better to have wrong settings then missing right moment......
 
Luke Kaven said:
ngtszhodavid said:
Luke Kaven said:
ngtszhodavid said:
Thanks, somehow it looks a bit dark and gloomy ...might be due to my monitor here

thanks for the suggestion though!
Click to expand...
Did you have a chance to try what I suggested above?

Luke Kaven wrote:

On that first shot, the all-white people in front of the all-white house, there might be more highlight information in there than you think.

Go back to the raw file and capture using the "neutral" setting (NX) or "linear" (C1) profile. The "standard" curve exaggerates the highlights to look more contrasty and pleasing. Sometimes it blows highlights that weren't blown in the raw file. There is sometimes up to a stop of difference, so it's worth a try.
Click to expand...
Cool thanks for the suggestion

I use LR. is there such profile?
Click to expand...
Yes, it's called either "camera linear" or "camera neutral". These are the cleanest numbers you can get, the closest representation to the true numbers coming off the sensor, without any tonal exaggeration. If there is any highlight headroom, this is where you will see it. I think you will be pleasantly surprised.

The neutral/linear profile is a good place to start for many images.
Click to expand...
Hi

sorry is it under Tone Curve?

I see Point curve Linear selected and can change to medium contrast or strong contrast
 
ngtszhodavid said:
Luke Kaven said:
ngtszhodavid said:
Luke Kaven said:
ngtszhodavid said:
Thanks, somehow it looks a bit dark and gloomy ...might be due to my monitor here

thanks for the suggestion though!
Click to expand...
Did you have a chance to try what I suggested above?

Luke Kaven wrote:

On that first shot, the all-white people in front of the all-white house, there might be more highlight information in there than you think.

Go back to the raw file and capture using the "neutral" setting (NX) or "linear" (C1) profile. The "standard" curve exaggerates the highlights to look more contrasty and pleasing. Sometimes it blows highlights that weren't blown in the raw file. There is sometimes up to a stop of difference, so it's worth a try.
Click to expand...
Cool thanks for the suggestion

I use LR. is there such profile?
Click to expand...
Yes, it's called either "camera linear" or "camera neutral". These are the cleanest numbers you can get, the closest representation to the true numbers coming off the sensor, without any tonal exaggeration. If there is any highlight headroom, this is where you will see it. I think you will be pleasantly surprised.

The neutral/linear profile is a good place to start for many images.
Click to expand...
Hi

sorry is it under Tone Curve?

I see Point curve Linear selected and can change to medium contrast or strong contrast
Click to expand...
It should be under "camera profiles". Many of the camera profiles carry an implicit tone curve, but are not considered as "tone curves" themselves.

You will like this trick once we get it worked out.
 
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