DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Individual Photograph Discussion >> Exposure Issue - Need Advice
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 14 of 14, (reverse)
AuthorThread
06/30/2004 10:22:42 PM · #1
I posted my website last week and asked for some C&C. Here is that Thread.

What I am looking for today is follow-up to some critique I got about Exposure. "Your landscapes are okay. I think they are a bit over exposed in general - esp. the waterfalls." I have since re-opened the original file of one of the waterfalls and spent a little more time with it. I myself thought the water looked a little too bleached. I am trying my best to learn this exposure thing, but I am still unsure. I am not sure if it is something I can fix with photoshop or a setting on my camera. Below is the original waterfall image that was commented on and my newer, hopefully better version. What do you think?


Original


New

Thanks in advance for any advice.

Dana
06/30/2004 10:37:16 PM · #2
the first looks soooo much better
06/30/2004 10:39:07 PM · #3
yeah... after taking a second look... the first has a mystical and surreal, soft look to it.. the second looks very bland and has crummy contrast.. the first looks profesional, the second is unapealing IMO
06/30/2004 10:53:03 PM · #4
Toss the second.
07/01/2004 02:10:27 AM · #5
Thanks guys. however, I have heard from several people that my shots are over exposed. I dont know what to believe!! Have a look:

//www.dbh.8m.com (sorry about the popup)

Dana
07/01/2004 03:34:04 AM · #6
Just had a quick squiz at your web site and IMO yourimages are outstanding. Some of your shots were obviously taken under some difficult lighting conditions and, particularly with running water, the longer the exposure under these conditions the more risk of overexposing your highlights. I think you have balanced your exposures very well. I am not familiar with your FinePix and it's controls but where possible I try to get an average reading from the camera by taking a reading from the highlights and one from the shadows. Then I'll try to figure out something inbetween taking the desired shutter speed and DOF into consideration. Doesn't always work though.
07/01/2004 04:15:53 AM · #7
The first one glows, it's vibrant, welcoming and alive. The 2nd looks like it was taken on a dull wet day and doesn't really make you want to go there.
07/01/2004 04:48:41 AM · #8
I loaded your picture in photoshop elements and had a look at the histogram with the levels command. (I find many people comment on overexposure even if the histogram does not show any overexposure, they probably just mean it is too bright for their liking).

If you have photoshop of photoshop elements try this :
* open the picture
* ctrl-l to do levels command (or via menu).
* hold the alt key and click the mouse on the right pointer underneath the histogram.

The picture will then show which area's are to the right of the pointer and therefore overexposed. In this case it is the top and the bottom of the waterfall which are overexposed and therefore loose detail. But on the other hand you have a nice spread across the whole historgram considering the circumstances, so I think your exposure here is spot on.

And yes, I agree with the others, your first is the best, second one looses its vibrance, no improvement at all.
07/01/2004 03:08:47 PM · #9
Originally posted by gajmaj:

Just had a quick squiz at your web site and IMO yourimages are outstanding. Some of your shots were obviously taken under some difficult lighting conditions and, particularly with running water, the longer the exposure under these conditions the more risk of overexposing your highlights. I think you have balanced your exposures very well. I am not familiar with your FinePix and it's controls but where possible I try to get an average reading from the camera by taking a reading from the highlights and one from the shadows. Then I'll try to figure out something inbetween taking the desired shutter speed and DOF into consideration. Doesn't always work though.


This is excellent advice and just the sort of critique I was looking for. THANKS! I took those waterfall photos around noon. I know this was a bad time and caused bad light, but I didnt expect to be there at that time nor did I bring my polarizer lens. Hindsight is 20/20.

Dana
07/01/2004 03:16:09 PM · #10
Originally posted by willem:

I loaded your picture in photoshop elements and had a look at the histogram with the levels command. (I find many people comment on overexposure even if the histogram does not show any overexposure, they probably just mean it is too bright for their liking).

If you have photoshop of photoshop elements try this :
* open the picture
* ctrl-l to do levels command (or via menu).
* hold the alt key and click the mouse on the right pointer underneath the histogram.

The picture will then show which area's are to the right of the pointer and therefore overexposed. In this case it is the top and the bottom of the waterfall which are overexposed and therefore loose detail. But on the other hand you have a nice spread across the whole historgram considering the circumstances, so I think your exposure here is spot on.

And yes, I agree with the others, your first is the best, second one looses its vibrance, no improvement at all.


Excellent Excellent!!! Thanks.. I can rest easier now. The overexposure comment really got to me (although I dont want to make her feel bad for leaving it, all comments are welcome). I knew the top and the bottom was overexposed, its pratically bleached white, but this was all I could do with the settings I have to work with. I was trying to slow down the shutter to get a nice foam on the water but for several reasons this didnt work right; my camera has a max slowness of 2 second shutter speed and it was either white like this or no effect at all, also it was around noon when I took it, the lighting was awful and I forgot my polarizer back at the hotel room. My camera is not DSLR but about as close as I could afford for the settings and features. I appreciate the help, especially how to tell about exposure in the Levels setting. I did not know how to do this, such a time saver!

Thanks to all who took the time to help :)

Cheers!

Dana
07/01/2004 04:18:00 PM · #11
Erogurl, you have many very lovely images on yur site. I love the one with the park bench.

I think it is very important to consider everyone's comments carefully. And you seem to be doing just that. This issue of overexposure often gets overblown (no pun intended). Just because areas of a picture are blown out slightly does not, in and of itself, mean that the whole picture is overexposed. You have to find the best lighting balance for a particular image. In this case, with the waterfalls, I think it is perfectly acceptable to allow for a little overexposure in the water in order to keep the whole picture properly balanced. This is partly because it is another way to help emphasize just how bright and dramatic the lighting actually was at the location. Even when you can replicate the lighting values from an actual scene exactly the resulting image can actually have a more negative effect, in some cases, and by inceasing the contrast and colors in the right manner you can compensate for the dramatic difference of viewing an image on paper as apposed to seeing it in real life. With all this being said there are some techniques that can be used to help reveal more details in the deep shadows and the bright highlights while still maintaining strong contrast. Some of your images could benefit from this application. If you have Photoshop CS then you can use the Shadow/Highlight filter and if you have a lower version of PS then I have a plugin that I created that does a similar job, though not quite as good as CS, that I could send you. There are also many other good PS plugins that open up shadow and highlight detail, you just have to do a little searching for them.

T
07/01/2004 04:31:57 PM · #12
Originally posted by GUYinaTIE:

yeah... after taking a second look... the first has a mystical and surreal, soft look to it.. the second looks very bland and has crummy contrast.. the first looks profesional, the second is unapealing IMO


I agree. The first shot is really gorgeous! The image invites me to look at longer and it certainly makes me wish I was there. Good job!
07/01/2004 04:54:46 PM · #13

Tim,

Thank you very much for your response. I agree, I also think its best for the water to be overexposed instead of the rest of the picture being underexposed. I would love to have this plug-in. I will be sending you a private message shortly. Thanks for taking the time to look and help.

Cheers,
Dana

p.s. Taking Cover is one of the first photos I saw when I started browsing DPC a few months ago, I was in awe. Its a beautiful photo and easily in the top 5 of my favourites on the site. Your darts photo and waterfall photo are also beautiful. You have a talent I hope to one day possess :o)


07/01/2004 06:33:11 PM · #14
Thank you Dana for your kind words. I sent you the Photoshop Actions (not a plugin, oops).

T
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 01:42:54 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 01:42:54 PM EDT.