Any photography experts out there?

[moresex4me]

FLASH photography. Why are so many pics using flash overexposed or underexposed? Isn't the camera smart enough to judge the right amount of flash needed to get a good pic every time?

Which is easier to correct afterwards? Overexposure (too much flash) or underexposure (too little flash)?

Short answer: you are SOL. If the camera didn't capture the pixels in that area due to either over or under exposure, no amount of processing will get them.

If you are only a little over or under exposed, then you can adjust, and it doesn't really matter which way.

As to the camera figuring it out, it did, but only for the part of the picture it was light metering. If the rest of the picture is different, due to distance or ambient lighting, the camera's not smart enough to figure that out. Most will use matrix metering, meaning the central part of your frame, so if you are using the 1/3 and not centering your subject, focus and exposure can be off.

First thing I do is turn matrixing off for both focusing and exposure, limiting it to the pinpoint center, then I'll focus on subject, shift the camera to the composition I want and then shoot. Works better for me, that way I'm choosing what data the camera uses, rather than a matrix.

Any pro's jump on here...

 

[Rockslinger]

I think its easier to fix underexposed post.

I tend to agree. If an underexposed shot is in focus, it is probably easier to brighten using software.

 

[tboy]

I tend to agree. If an underexposed shot is in focus, it is probably easier to brighten using software.

The problem with digital over film is even if a film shot is way overexposed, as long as the grains aren't completely burned away, you could still recover the image using dodging and or burning.

The reason the auto flash often overexposes some areas and not others is because it is using a single light source and that source is omnidirectional (meaning points in one direction). For eg: one of the hardest scenes to shoot is a baptist church scene. Black people wearing white (often BRIGHT white) clothing. Either the clothes are completely washed out, or their faces are completely blacked out.

EVERY camera is set to expose to mid tone grey. You can buy an accurate grey card at any good camera shop. The correct way to expose an image is to read off this grey card or use a hand held light meter. You then take readings from various points in the scene. That way you expose to the average reading, not just spot. A lot of new digital cameras use an averaging method of measuring reflected light. I think nikons give you the option to measure using: average/spot/centre weighted. Centre weighted takes the reading off the middle 1/3 of the scene. Average measures the entire scene, spot will measure a precise tight spot (say the light reflecting off a stripper's nipple for eg).

As stated, one way to avoid over/under exposure is to bounce the flash off a ceiling, wall, or use a bounce flash card but normally they only work on external flashes (which any photographer will have. Notice I said P H O T O G R A P H E R???).

 

[tboy]

I tend to agree. If an underexposed shot is in focus, it is probably easier to brighten using software.

BTW: even if a digital shot is out of focus, you can still clean it up using photoshop.

 

[Rockslinger]

For eg: one of the hardest scenes to shoot is a baptist church scene. Black people wearing white (often BRIGHT white) clothing.

And I thought shooting a kids birthday party by candle lights was tough. Same problem with shooting a video, can never seem to get a good video in low light (at least the sound capture is ok).

 

[tboy]

And I thought shooting a kids birthday party by candle lights was tough. Same problem with shooting a video, can never seem to get a good video in low light (at least the sound capture is ok).

Have you ever seen a movie shoot outside at night? They have those HUGE "night lights" to light the whole scene....

In the olden days they used to shoot in daylight then underexpose the print. Ever notice in the old westerns all the shadows????

I mean, not EVERY night can be a full moon lol

 

[spitze]

A suggested must read (imo) is "Understanding Exposure" by Bryan Peterson. Check it out.

Yeap...get that book and forget about paying Henry for Lessons that book is a MUST

 

[sailorsix]

also check out http://digital-photography-school.com/ for tips

 

[spitze]

There are few things as satisfying as making a great picture with a mechanical film camera, especially one as great as the GM (ok, maybe a Leica M6). I love the thought and consideration that goes into shooting film. Unfortunately, digital wins for sheer convenience.

As for megapixels, that's only one factor. It's the whole package that goes into making a great picture - sensor, glass and processing software. The latter can make a huge difference. Try comparing prosumer Nikons and Sony dslrs...I much prefer the Sony image (but shoot Nikons because I have too much invested in glass.

I'm still shooting Mid Format Film and Digital can't get that Film "feel" Neva ! I shoot with a canon 1D mark III and when I compare the shots with my Mamiya it's hard to decide...very hard

 

[a 1 player]

for every photo you published a photographer will take hundreds if not thousands to get that perfect shot.

This is very true. Though I am an amateur, (I am getting pretty good though), if I get 1 in 100 great shots I consider myself doing well. I might get 50 or 60 good shots, but it is quite rare to get a great shot.

Other things I'd suggest are:

-Really learn about how aperture and shutter speed work together, especially when creating depth of feild.
-Buy the best glass you can afford for your camera, and buy a variety co cover all situations. I have a 18mm-55mm f3.5-f5.6, 55mm-250mm f4-f5.6, 100mm macro f2.8, 500mm f4, 50mm f1.4. This can cover pretty well everything I might come across.
-Push your own boundaries. Shoot things you usually would not.
-Learn the basic rules, like the rule of thirds etc.
-Study other people's stuff, good and bad
-Learn Photoshop, to enhance colors and that sort of thing.

 

[tboy]

Oh yeah, one thing that player brings up: don't expect every shot to be a magazine cover. Hell, the pros shoot THOUSANDS of shots to get just one.

I remember watching a special on the SI swimsuit edition and they showed just one day's shots laid out on contact sheets and it covered a 4 x 8 table. Probably 5,000 frames total (and they might not use even ONE shot).

 

[Rockslinger]

I remember watching a special on the SI swimsuit edition and they showed just one day's shots laid out on contact sheets and it covered a 4 x 8 table. Probably 5,000 frames total.

Can't blame the photographers. Even if every shot was perfect, I would still take 5,000 shots with those models. Reminds me of the time when they interviewed this actor and they asked him why the nude sex scene with that gorgeous actress took 30 takes .

 

[Rockslinger]

For important occasions like your wedding (you only get married once), hire a pro and pay the money. Do not use your best friend.

 

[tboy]

For important occasions like your wedding (you only get married once), hire a pro and pay the money. Do not use your best friend.

Unless your best friend is a photographer.....

One thing where using someone you know, the photos come out more natural looking intead of the cookie cutter wedding photos you see all the time.

I did one buddy's wedding and they were all members of a band. The BEST shot of the day was when they were taking a break from posing and just hanging out on this big stone monolith that had stairs running up the left and right. The guys were sitting on the steps, leaning on the wrought iron handrail and the girls were on the opposite stairs doing the same. My GF was a bridesmaid and I told her to quietly just walk up and start talking to one of the other girls while I got the shot. No one knew i was shooting until way afterwards they saw the print. Seriously, it looked like an album cover.....

 

[moresex4me]

I agree... most wedding photographers shoot the same cheesy shots, when what you really want is the candid moments captured. Those are the best, not the set up stuff the parents want to ensure they have hanging on their walls.

 

[Rockslinger]

I agree... most wedding photographers shoot the same cheesy shots, when what you really want is the candid moments captured. Those are the best, not the set up stuff the parents want to ensure they have hanging on their walls.

Ok guys. Get a pro and your best friend. (Why are my kids birthday party pics so terrible?)