Help my daughter/s-i-l out

Discussion in 'Digital Cameras' started by Tony Cooper, Feb 7, 2014.

  1. Tony Cooper

    J. Clarke Guest

    RAW doesn't do a thing about blown highlights, but it can recover a
    great deal of shadow detail--the idea is that you expose for the
    highlights and process for the shadows.
     
    J. Clarke, Feb 8, 2014
    #41
    1. Advertisements

  2. Tony Cooper

    RichA Guest


    You can still get a fair dollar for you current camera if you sell it. Sell it, buy a used D300, a used D7000, or even a used D90. Any of them willsolve your problem, or most of it, and if you have good lenses, you'll geteven better pictures. That's the simplest way to do it. I see D300's nowgoing for $400.
     
    RichA, Feb 8, 2014
    #42
    1. Advertisements

  3. Then why do you say the histogram for that image show
    "spot on" exposure? It clearly does not.
    The RAW histogram? What would the RAW histogram for
    that image mean?
    So the photographer wants to see detail in the whites,
    they are totally clipped, there is space at the dark
    end... and you say it is spot on with exposure.

    That is absurd!

    Most images, by the way, have more dynamic range that
    most cameras can cope with.

    You seem to think that putting middle gray in the
    "right" place according to a light meter means "spot on"
    exposure. That is hilarious!
    But I bet that more surf when the sun is out, and few
    surf in the dark.
    Which means that your idea of spot on will still not be
    spot on.
     
    Floyd L. Davidson, Feb 8, 2014
    #43
  4. It's not just in theory, but in practice it will produce the results
    that Tony asked for. Making the shadows dark isn't going to destroy
    the image in the same way that clipping highlights does.

    Incidentally, how is lighting "so variable" under those conditions?
    No clouds and the background is always the ocean! It's not going to
    change much in any given hour until within about an hour of sunset.
     
    Floyd L. Davidson, Feb 8, 2014
    #44
  5. Tony Cooper

    David Taylor Guest

    Easiest - set the exposure compensation to -0.3 stops. Permanently.
     
    David Taylor, Feb 8, 2014
    #45
  6. Tony Cooper

    me Guest

    Why not? There appears to be specular reflections off the bodies of
    the dolphins themselves an off the churned water. This seems the
    exact condition a polarizer can help with.
     
    me, Feb 8, 2014
    #46
  7. Maybe off the dolphin, but that's not what the white water is.
     
    Floyd L. Davidson, Feb 8, 2014
    #47
  8. Tony Cooper

    Robert Coe Guest

    : On 2/7/2014 5:49 PM, Robert Coe wrote:
    : > On Fri, 07 Feb 2014 17:30:00 -0500, Tony Cooper <>
    : > wrote:
    : > : On Fri, 07 Feb 2014 10:56:46 -0900, (Floyd L.
    : > : Davidson) wrote:
    : > :
    : > : >>My daughter and son-in-law live in a beach town in northern Florida
    : > : >>and do quite a bit of photography involving ocean waves. S-I-L does
    : > : >>mostly surfers.
    : > : >>
    : > : >>Too often, the whitecaps result in blow-out and complete absence of
    : > : >>color and detail. Like this:
    : > : >>https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgkqm8u7dxxoach/166c.jpg
    : > : >>
    : > : >>Any suggestions on how to avoid this?
    : >
    : > Any chance that bright light is polarized? It wouldn't hurt to screw on a
    : > filter and see if it helps.
    : >
    : > : >Learn ETTR, and teach it to the kids.
    : > :
    : > : They are in their mid-40s.
    : >
    : > So are mine. They're still kids. Well... They were until they had their own
    : > kids of double-digit age. ;^)
    : >
    :
    : Therefore, even if my kids, (both in their mid forties,) never have
    : children, they will always be my kids. ;-)

    Yup!

    : We have three grandchildren, with 12 legs between them, one of whom is
    : competing in Westminster tomorrow.

    A beautiful, intelligent retriever, perhaps? ;^)

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Feb 8, 2014
    #48
  9. Tony Cooper

    Robert Coe Guest

    : >On Fri, 7 Feb 2014 17:34:19 -0800, Savageduck
    : >
    : >>On 2014-02-07 22:49:54 +0000, Robert Coe <> said:
    : >>
    : >>> On Fri, 07 Feb 2014 17:30:00 -0500, Tony Cooper <>
    : >>> wrote:
    : >>> : On Fri, 07 Feb 2014 10:56:46 -0900, (Floyd L.
    : >>> : Davidson) wrote:
    : >>> :
    : >>> : >>My daughter and son-in-law live in a beach town in northern Florida
    : >>> : >>and do quite a bit of photography involving ocean waves. S-I-L does
    : >>> : >>mostly surfers.
    : >>> : >>
    : >>> : >>Too often, the whitecaps result in blow-out and complete absence of
    : >>> : >>color and detail. Like this:
    : >>> : >>https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgkqm8u7dxxoach/166c.jpg
    : >>> : >>
    : >>> : >>Any suggestions on how to avoid this?
    : >>>
    : >>> Any chance that bright light is polarized? It wouldn't hurt to screw on a
    : >>> filter and see if it helps.
    : >>
    : >>The problem is blown highlights. A CPL isn't going to help too much.
    : >
    : >Why not? There appears to be specular reflections off the bodies of
    : >the dolphins themselves an off the churned water. This seems the
    : >exact condition a polarizer can help with.
    :
    : Maybe off the dolphin, but that's not what the white water is.

    An alternative view is that the white water is OK. If you're on-scene, your
    eyes are going to be almost as overwhelmed by the bright light as the camera
    is. IOW, what you'd see is what the picture shows. Blown highlights are a
    problem when they're unnatural, i.e., when you can't see detail that you'd
    see, or think you'd see, in reality. But nobody who lives near the ocean,
    especially in a place as bright as Florida, would expect to resolve much
    detail in that white water.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Feb 8, 2014
    #49
  10. Tony Cooper

    Savageduck Guest

    Yup!
     
    Savageduck, Feb 8, 2014
    #50
  11. Tony Cooper

    Robert Coe Guest

    :
    : >On Fri, 07 Feb 2014 17:32:19 -0500, Tony Cooper <>
    : >wrote:
    : >: On Fri, 07 Feb 2014 16:44:55 -0500, Alan Browne
    : >:
    : >: >On 2014.02.07, 12:54 , Tony Cooper wrote:
    : >: >> My daughter and son-in-law live in a beach town in northern Florida
    : >: >> and do quite a bit of photography involving ocean waves. S-I-L does
    : >: >> mostly surfers.
    : >: >>
    : >: >> Too often, the whitecaps result in blow-out and complete absence of
    : >: >> color and detail. Like this:
    : >: >> https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgkqm8u7dxxoach/166c.jpg
    : >: >>
    : >: >> Any suggestions on how to avoid this?
    : >: >
    : >: >What Joe said - esp. shooting raw.
    : >: >
    : >: >+ spot meter for the highlights and open up 2 to 2.3 stops - 2.5 stops
    : >: > with more recent (last 5 years) cameras.
    : >: >
    : >: >+ shoot nearer to the 'golden hour(s)' where the scene DR is
    : >: > more compressed.
    : >:
    : >: Most of their shots of this type are taken in the early morning with
    : >: the camera shooting west to east into the sun. If the subject is
    : >: surfers, the shots have to be taken when the surfers surf.
    : >
    : >Do they have surf on the Gulf side? If so, tell them to go over there to
    : >photograph surfers in the AM. If they stay 'til nightfall, they can get
    : >sunsets too. Sunsets over water are tough to get on the East Coast. (That's
    : >why we have Cape Cod.)
    :
    : I don't mean to force you to drag information out of me, but S-I-L
    : makes a nice side income selling his photographs to the surfers. He's
    : also been published in some of the surfing magazines.

    I knew that, and I suspected that drumming up a new clientele would be a
    barrier to changing sides. But I fugured that in principle, if the surfers on
    one side of the peninsula are vain enough to pay to have their pictures taken,
    those on the other side probably are too. :^)

    : Photographing local surfers is key to the income aspect. He's known
    : to all the local surfers, and they contact him for prints or
    : downloads. He has to shoot locally - east coast - to do this.
    :
    : The blow-out problem is less important to the surfers than it would be
    : in another type of shot. All they care about is what they look like
    : in the image. Still, aesthetically, it would be good to reduce the
    : problem.
    :
    : Daughter has done some good sunrise shots.

    Sunrises are inherently trickier than sunsets. You can often see a good sunset
    coming, whereupon you can get your camera ready and wait it out, taking
    picture after picture as the light changes. You usually can't do that with a
    sunrise; by the time you see it and get set up, it's apt to be past its prime.
    The default is to show up in the dark and hope for the best. That said, there
    have been several occasions when I've been driving to the station early on a
    summer morning, spotted a spectacular sunrise, and cursed myself for not
    having a camera with me. But then I have to remind myself that there's really
    no good place to stop and that I have a train to catch.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Feb 8, 2014
    #51
  12. Tony Cooper

    Robert Coe Guest

    : >On 2014-02-08 01:50:22 +0000, (Floyd L. Davidson) said:
    : >
    : >>> On 2014-02-07 17:54:12 +0000, Tony Cooper <> said:
    : >>>
    : >>>> My daughter and son-in-law live in a beach town in northern Florida
    : >>>> and do quite a bit of photography involving ocean waves. S-I-L does
    : >>>> mostly surfers.
    : >>>> Too often, the whitecaps result in blow-out and
    : >>>> complete absence of
    : >>>> color and detail. Like this:
    : >>>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgkqm8u7dxxoach/166c.jpg
    : >>>> Any suggestions on how to avoid this?
    : >>> Floyd is correct, with a quick look at the histogram
    : >>> the problem is obvious.
    : >>> < https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_550.jpg >
    : >>> The basic histogram is good, but on the extreme right the clipped
    : >>> highlights are wiping out any detail. So stop down a hair and use the
    : >>> EV adjustment to dial things back a bit.
    : >>> The camera used not withstanding, it is going to be
    : >>> important to either
    : >>> spot meter or center weight average on the highlights, in this case the
    : >>> foam of breaking waves, etc. So, definately ETTR, *exposure To The
    : >>> Right*.
    : >>> Once the basic exposure for this scene in this light is figured out
    : >>> check the histogram for clipped highlights & the good old "Blinkies",
    : >>> and use the EV adjustment as required.
    : >> What exactly is "EV adjustment"?
    : >> EV is Exposure Value, or the reading from a light
    : >> meter.
    : >
    : >Once more my poor selection of words and letters has bitten me in the
    : >butt. I should have used the term (for Nikon at least) of "Exposure
    : >compensation". I might well have been misled by the what can be found
    : >in my D300S manual. (I have to stop reading those things, they are
    : >starting to confuse me.)
    : >< https://db.tt/bn8P9ZaB >
    :
    : I thought that you probably meant EC rather than EV, but
    : didn't want to jump on you until it was positive.
    :
    : With that in mind, your statement to "stop down a hair
    : and use the EV adjustment to dial things back a bit" is
    : absurd! At least if you meant what you said. The
    : Exposure Compensation will counter *anything* you do to
    : "stop down"! Crank it down with one hand and crank it
    : right back with the other...

    That's true up to a point. If you're using automatic exposure and you stop
    down more, the camera will compensate (by lowering the shutter speed) to
    maintain the light input it thinks it needs for the given ISO setting. So
    stopping down does nothing useful in this case. But the EC setting, at least
    on every camera I've owned, tells the camera to use a specified amount more
    (or less) exposure than it would otherwise deem appropriate, given the ISO
    setting. Changing the EC setting doesn't cancel out the change in f stop,
    because the camera has already done that.

    : I hope, though, that you really meant to use EC to "dial
    : things back a bit" as the way to "stop down a hair".
    : Hence a +1 EC would reduce exposure by 1 stop.

    I'm pretty sure that on my Canons a +1 EC will *increase* exposure by one
    stop. (I guess I'd better verify that the next time I have the manual up on
    the screen.)
     
    Robert Coe, Feb 8, 2014
    #52
  13. Tony Cooper

    Savageduck Guest

    The CPL might help some other other issues with the scene, but it will
    do nothing to save the blown highlights.
     
    Savageduck, Feb 8, 2014
    #53
  14. Tony Cooper

    Robert Coe Guest

    : >On Fri, 07 Feb 2014 16:22:03 -0900, (Floyd L.
    : >Davidson) wrote:
    : >
    : >>>>The compromise is to buy yourself a new camera and give them one of your
    : >>>>current bodies.
    : >>>
    : >>>I shoot with a Nikon D60. Hardly an upgrade to anyone.
    : >>
    : >>Okay, stingy isn't the right word, you miserly old fart.
    : >
    : >When I bought the camera, I promised myself I'd buy a better camera
    : >when I became a good enough photographer that the camera was the only
    : >thing that was holding me back from better photographs.
    : >
    : >That hasn't happened yet.
    :
    : Well, I wasn't going to mention that...
    :
    : >It's always tempting to buy newer and better equipment, but we mostly
    : >fool ourselves if we think that a better camera will result in better
    : >photographs.
    : >
    : >Send two people out with cameras and tell them to come back with a
    : >good photograph, and the winner will not necessarily be the one with
    : >the better camera. It will be the one who sees what could make a good
    : >photograph, who composes that scene correctly, and who understands
    : >what settings to use for the shot.
    :
    : That is almost right. It's not the one who sees what
    : makes a good photo. It's the one who knows which good
    : photo to look for when using *that* camera.
    :
    : Your posted photo is a great example, because while a
    : D2XS was once the best professional camera made by
    : Nikon, and because it was indeed a pro model is still
    : worth considering to be a *very* nice camera... the
    : fact is that the bottom of the Nikon line today will
    : shoot surfing pictures that are vastly better than
    : anything that D2XS can do.
    :
    : It is not difficult to do with a D3200, and it is
    : relatively not at all easy with a D2XS.
    :
    : >I see far too many mediocre images taken with superior cameras to
    : >think that it's the equipment that determines success.
    :
    : I see far too many potential photographs that cannot be
    : shot with mediocre cameras to miss the fact that a great
    : camera is a wonderful thing to own.
    :
    : The great camera doesn't necessarily make the
    : photographer great, but you just don't see great
    : photographers running around very often snapping shots
    : with shitty cameras either. It's a waste to of time.

    I tend to agree with Floyd, though I wouldn't put it just that way. Indeed,
    like Pavlov's dogs, I can be counted to phrase my opinion thus, whenever the
    subject comes up:

    "Better equipment will make any photographer better. How much better depends
    on how good the photographer already is. The better the photographer already
    is, the more difference better equipment will make."

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Feb 8, 2014
    #54
  15. Tony Cooper

    Robert Coe Guest

    : On 2014-02-08 12:10:56 +0000, me <> said:
    :
    : > On Fri, 7 Feb 2014 17:34:19 -0800, Savageduck
    : >
    : >> On 2014-02-07 22:49:54 +0000, Robert Coe <> said:
    : >>
    : >>> On Fri, 07 Feb 2014 17:30:00 -0500, Tony Cooper <>
    : >>> wrote:
    : >>> : On Fri, 07 Feb 2014 10:56:46 -0900, (Floyd L.
    : >>> : Davidson) wrote:
    : >>> :
    : >>> : >>My daughter and son-in-law live in a beach town in northern Florida
    : >>> : >>and do quite a bit of photography involving ocean waves. S-I-L does
    : >>> : >>mostly surfers.
    : >>> : >>
    : >>> : >>Too often, the whitecaps result in blow-out and complete absence of
    : >>> : >>color and detail. Like this:
    : >>> : >>https://www.dropbox.com/s/lgkqm8u7dxxoach/166c.jpg
    : >>> : >>
    : >>> : >>Any suggestions on how to avoid this?
    : >>>
    : >>> Any chance that bright light is polarized? It wouldn't hurt to screw on a
    : >>> filter and see if it helps.
    : >>
    : >> The problem is blown highlights. A CPL isn't going to help too much.
    : >
    : > Why not? There appears to be specular reflections off the bodies of
    : > the dolphins themselves an off the churned water. This seems the
    : > exact condition a polarizer can help with.
    :
    : The CPL might help some other other issues with the scene, but it will
    : do nothing to save the blown highlights.

    You're probably right in this case, but it isn't a given. The thing about
    blown highlights is that it's hard to tell how "blown" they really are. If a
    scene is only a little over the top and a significant amount of the light that
    caused it is polarized, a polarizer could help you recover some detail.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Feb 8, 2014
    #55
  16. Tony Cooper

    Savageduck Guest

    Yup!
    In this example of mine you can see that there are some highlight peaks
    ("a little over the top") where detail is lost, but that is
    inconsequential given the other content to be found in the "white"
    areas of the wave. No CPF used.
    This on the West coast at Pismo Beach, looking North West from the pier.
    < https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_552.jpg >
     
    Savageduck, Feb 8, 2014
    #56
  17. Tony Cooper

    Alan Browne Guest

    You're misunderstanding, however. The histo from a saved JPG does not
    at all resemble the in-camera histo at the time of the shot. In that
    case the right edge of the histo would be much more of a spike.
     
    Alan Browne, Feb 8, 2014
    #57
  18. Tony Cooper

    Alan Browne Guest

    The lack of glare/flare, reflections off of the water, and the
    highlights on the dolphins suggest it was closer to a right angle to the
    sun and not 'into the sun'.

    Back to the white block then: it's to raw and spot-metering and opening
    up from that reading (not that it's easy at all to do on such a subject).
     
    Alan Browne, Feb 8, 2014
    #58
  19. Tony Cooper

    Savageduck Guest

    Savageduck, Feb 8, 2014
    #59
  20. Tony Cooper

    J. Clarke Guest

    Personally I can never remember which way it goes and have to shoot a
    couple of test shots and chimp the histogram every time I need to use
    it.
     
    J. Clarke, Feb 8, 2014
    #60
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.