Question about exposure settings
Discussion
1) Graduated Neutral density filter - move it around to darken the sky without the car.
2) Do pretty much what you've done (can use the bracketing setting on the camera if there), and composite them - overlay and align both images as layers, then mask the bad bit out of the top one to allow the good bit to show through.
3) Wait until the end(s) of the day when the light is less harsh.
Not much you can do otherwise, there's simply more range of exposure than the camera can handle - Not sure what's current state of the art, but 7 stops or so is probably something like the range between white and black as far as the chip is concerned. If there's a huge difference between the light and dark tones as there are here, you're stuffed. This is why midday is a bad time to take photos
2) Do pretty much what you've done (can use the bracketing setting on the camera if there), and composite them - overlay and align both images as layers, then mask the bad bit out of the top one to allow the good bit to show through.
3) Wait until the end(s) of the day when the light is less harsh.
Not much you can do otherwise, there's simply more range of exposure than the camera can handle - Not sure what's current state of the art, but 7 stops or so is probably something like the range between white and black as far as the chip is concerned. If there's a huge difference between the light and dark tones as there are here, you're stuffed. This is why midday is a bad time to take photos
upsidedownmark said:
1) Graduated Neutral density filter - move it around to darken the sky without the car.
2) Do pretty much what you've done (can use the bracketing setting on the camera if there), and composite them - overlay and align both images as layers, then mask the bad bit out of the top one to allow the good bit to show through.
3) Wait until the end(s) of the day when the light is less harsh.
Not much you can do otherwise, there's simply more range of exposure than the camera can handle - Not sure what's current state of the art, but 7 stops or so is probably something like the range between white and black as far as the chip is concerned. If there's a huge difference between the light and dark tones as there are here, you're stuffed. This is why midday is a bad time to take photos
Yes this.2) Do pretty much what you've done (can use the bracketing setting on the camera if there), and composite them - overlay and align both images as layers, then mask the bad bit out of the top one to allow the good bit to show through.
3) Wait until the end(s) of the day when the light is less harsh.
Not much you can do otherwise, there's simply more range of exposure than the camera can handle - Not sure what's current state of the art, but 7 stops or so is probably something like the range between white and black as far as the chip is concerned. If there's a huge difference between the light and dark tones as there are here, you're stuffed. This is why midday is a bad time to take photos
It looks like you could dial down the exposure in the top pic by about 1.5 stops, then lighten up the car in post processing too. This would give you some better detail in the sky.
Only if you are working at very close range, you can also underexpose the background and light up the foreground with flash (at close range, as you need a lot of flash power to do this in daylight).
See pic; has some post processing but not that much. Model was illumintated by flash but you can still see detail in the sky.
I'd have used a tripod and 'bracketed' across a range of exposures - gives you maximum flexibility to get the shot you want in photoshop (or other package)
Or, to do it in one shot expose the sky as brighly as you can (without 'clipping') and then boost the shadow areas - and live with any noise that is generated
If possible i'd have taken the first option
Or, to do it in one shot expose the sky as brighly as you can (without 'clipping') and then boost the shadow areas - and live with any noise that is generated
If possible i'd have taken the first option
flat-planedCrank said:
Or, to do it in one shot expose the sky as brighly as you can (without 'clipping') and then boost the shadow areas - and live with any noise that is generated
Assuming the OP is shooting RAW, do it the other way around. There's a lot more information in the brighter stops than in the darker ones, so it's more beneficial to pull back an over-exposed sky than to boost underexposed areas.Major Bloodnok said:
flat-planedCrank said:
Or, to do it in one shot expose the sky as brighly as you can (without 'clipping') and then boost the shadow areas - and live with any noise that is generated
Assuming the OP is shooting RAW, do it the other way around. There's a lot more information in the brighter stops than in the darker ones, so it's more beneficial to pull back an over-exposed sky than to boost underexposed areas.If the sky is 'normally' exposed then the main subject could be so underexposed that trying to lift it just turns it into grey mush
Chop the sky from one pic and stick it on the other? This is a 5 minute job but you get the idea
sky and car by Dibbly Dobbler, on Flickr
sky and car by Dibbly Dobbler, on Flickr
Slightly more seriously....
Take shots in RAW, because that's where you'll manage the greatest dynamic range.
Use the hystericalgram and manual - or set off a bracketted sequence. Back at the ranch merge (my preference is Photomatix Pro - but you're not going for the stark "HDR Look") et voila!
Black cars are especially fun!
TVR T350c -19 by Beano!, on Flickr
TVR T350c -20 by Beano!, on Flickr
Take shots in RAW, because that's where you'll manage the greatest dynamic range.
Use the hystericalgram and manual - or set off a bracketted sequence. Back at the ranch merge (my preference is Photomatix Pro - but you're not going for the stark "HDR Look") et voila!
Black cars are especially fun!
TVR T350c -19 by Beano!, on Flickr
TVR T350c -20 by Beano!, on Flickr
Edited by K12beano on Sunday 8th September 08:29
DibblyDobbler said:
Chop the sky from one pic and stick it on the other? This is a 5 minute job but you get the idea
sky and car by Dibbly Dobbler, on Flickr
That's what I was aiming for , but that's cheating!sky and car by Dibbly Dobbler, on Flickr
I've only had a DSLR about a month and don't have any post processing software at the moment. Oh well, that's something else to learn.
AndyS2 said:
That's what I was aiming for , but that's cheating!
I've only had a DSLR about a month and don't have any post processing software at the moment. Oh well, that's something else to learn.
Before you get the cheque book out on any software choices:I've only had a DSLR about a month and don't have any post processing software at the moment. Oh well, that's something else to learn.
- have you RTFM for the camera - not that I'd let it, but my dSLR will actually do a bit of trickery inside
- free or 30 day trial is your first software foray!
davepoth said:
A graduated filter would probably do what the OP is looking for.
I have nothing against the humble grad. And in the hands of the talented - including many who frequent these parts - they can be a great solution.For the less talented like me, and possibly the OP while on the early part of his learning curve, I just think the grad is a fiddly solution, slows the process down (not necessarily a bad thing!) and becomes a complete frustration when your horizon is no longer an unbroken straight line that you can match the transition to.
Just my tuppence. OMMV.
upsidedownmark said:
Simpo Two said:
You will have to cheat to achieve what you want. The human eye looks across a scene and adjusts itself for focus and exposure as it goes. A camera can't do that.
This. If you want to be purist, wait for better light 
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff