| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/11/2003 12:51:03 PM · #1 |
Was out shooting in the fog the other day, and have just been working on some of the shots. Ever find that you tend to under-expose quite seriously in fog, otherwise the sky just whites-out completely? You end up with very grey shots, and then the sky goes all grainy when you try to lighten it? There is something of a solution ...
Two steps. Using Brightness/Contrast, lighten the whole image until the sky is just on the threshold of pure white - don't add any contrast at this point. Second step - use levels or curves (couldn't find a preference) to bring back the blacks and dark areas.
The downside is that you're processing the image twice - but that's far out-weighed by the up-side, which is that you end up with a far more pleasant looking evenly graduated sky: basically because your not reducing the bandwidth of the light areas, just of the dark.
ed
|
|
|
|
12/11/2003 01:00:36 PM · #2 |
| Try an EV adjustment of +1 when photographing in the fog. |
|
|
|
12/11/2003 01:08:08 PM · #3 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Try an EV adjustment of +1 when photographing in the fog. |
Good advice for any bright scene. |
|
|
|
12/11/2003 02:31:38 PM · #4 |
|
|
|
12/11/2003 02:35:10 PM · #5 |
Yup, it is better to expose for it correctly in the first place, a +1 or so compensation will give you white fog rather than the grey you'll probably get by default... Better to fix the cause, rather than fix the symptom (I.e., neat image and all those things people use to fix bad shots)
Message edited by author 2003-12-11 14:39:10. |
|
|
|
12/11/2003 03:20:49 PM · #6 |
And Neat Image, while often a great help in reducing noise in a clear sky, can sometimes give results like this with grey clouds/fog:
I overexagerated the effect in this picture, but that was because it was happening in the first place, so I thought the effect might work if pushed to an extreme. And yes, this one was underexposed, so its a perfect example of what Gordon's saying - get it right in the first place. |
|
|
|
12/11/2003 03:46:15 PM · #7 |
removed
Message edited by author 2003-12-11 15:49:04.
|
|
|
|
12/11/2003 03:46:34 PM · #8 |
removed
Message edited by author 2003-12-11 15:49:56.
|
|
|
|
12/11/2003 03:48:05 PM · #9 |
removed
Message edited by author 2003-12-11 15:50:11.
|
|
|
|
12/11/2003 03:48:42 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by e301:
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Try an EV adjustment of +1 when photographing in the fog. |
Tricky when shooting manually. |
It's not tricky at all.. just slow the shutter down one more stop from whatever your meter tells you. |
|
|
|
12/11/2003 03:55:26 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Originally posted by e301:
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Try an EV adjustment of +1 when photographing in the fog. |
Tricky when shooting manually. |
It's not tricky at all.. just slow the shutter down one more stop from whatever your meter tells you. |
John - I understand how my camera works thankyou. All I was suggesting was a solution for a particular example of things going wrong. In fact on this particular occasion, if I shot as my camera metered I got an over-exposed image - so I reduced that by approximatley one stop. On getting home, I found that a number (not all, as the amount of sunlight getting through the fog was constantly varying) of my shots were quite heavily under-exposed - the white point being near 180,180,180 sometimes. All I was suggesting here was a solution to this problem, which I cannot be the only one to have suffered, even if all the replies are from people infinitely cleverer than I.
I feel that I'm being treated as an idiot here, which I am not.
Ed
|
|
|
|
12/11/2003 03:59:33 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by e301:
I feel that I'm being treated as an idiot here, which I am not.
Ed |
Ed -- I know I can't remember every member's skill set, and also that comment might be really helpful to some other member who's browsing the forums trying to pick up tips. I really don't think any negative implication was intended by John's remarks. |
|
|
|
12/11/2003 03:59:37 PM · #13 |
Just curious, what meter mode where you using when it was over exposing everything ?
Message edited by author 2003-12-11 16:24:40. |
|
|
|
12/11/2003 08:08:11 PM · #14 |
| Guess I lost track of the original comment. Sorry Ed. This is something I do myself far too often. I'll have to give your tip a try when I get home. I've got lots of shots to choose from.... |
|
|
|
12/11/2003 08:30:31 PM · #15 |
|
|
|
12/11/2003 11:22:25 PM · #16 |
Fog is an almost daily reality where I live. It's never the same either. I can be so thick, you can't drive or even ride a bike safely. Sometimes it stands, then it rolls, drifts or wafts. It may be white or dark, cloud-like.
I have taken many pictures in fog: from a mountain ridge -looking down, from the sea - looking up or across a straight obscuring islands, slopes, pinnacles, what have you. I've taken pictures at any time of day, from dawn to night.
The only thing I've come away with knowing is that, under such conditions, the light varies so wildly, that bracketing at plus/minus 0.3EV - 0.7 rarely suffices, and that 1.0EV is the minimum bracket step value to cover even a limited range of light during the day.
It has happened to me (at higher elevation or at sea) that I could see the sun's halo through fog, looked through the viewfinder, and when I looked up again, it was like dusk or nearly clear. In cases like this, even bracketing becomes a matter of luck or conjecture.
A different problem arises from coordination (from the heart ((ah!)) via the head ((no, not this, not that, not so, but so...)) to the hand and controls. Taking pictures of and in fog, to me, is one of the most challenging and exciting experiences as a photographer. Coordination remains something I am still practicing, in fact, it often eludes me altogether.
Equipment plays a role as well. The Zeiss lens on the F717 I use now, tends to 'cut' fog, the Minolta 7i loves focusing on it, my old S85 (Sony) however, often sees things the way I do. To me, different cameras and lenses have different personalities. My advice, if I can be so bold to give advice, is to use equipment you know best (under adverse or variable conditions) and, if possible, use a camera/lens that naturally enhances that which you want to see in the final picture as opposed to fighting it.
Another thing that has helped me get a few decent fog shots on occasion, is a somewhat strange, but very acute state of mind, which appears to allow me to take pictures I want or yearn to see without the hassle of having to translate technical considerations to my hands, feet and camera controls. If this makes any sense to anyone... ;-)
|
|
|
|
12/11/2003 11:51:27 PM · #17 |
| any pictures of a fogbow ? I'm curious to see one... |
|
|
|
12/12/2003 12:29:59 AM · #18 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Just curious, what meter mode where you using when it was over exposing everything ? |
Good point ... I belive it was centre-weighted matrix, which generally gives the best idea of the balance of subject and overall scene I find, with the Nikon. Also I was shooting toward the end of the day, so with fog thickening and light fading the conditions were very changeable - at f/8 I was exposing for anything between 1/8 and 4 seconds. From experience with the 5400 in that mode, keeping the meter reading in the lower half of the scale usually gives a pretty good evaluation ... was quite surprised to find things so badly under when I got home.
And sorry for any over-reaction earlier - a little tired here :-)
Ed
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/29/2025 10:49:07 AM EDT.
