File :-(, x, )
noobish question Anonymous
i was gonna shoot a picture of something like i've drawn right here. (u dont have to tell me that i'm pro in paint)

the problem was that depending on where i pointed the cam to, either the sky was overexposed, or the trees and the ground ('grass') were too dark.

i tried lowering the contrast (on the cam) but it didnt help much.


so, how do u usually take a pic of that to have the sky and the ground/trees at a good brightness/contrast?
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
HDR (done properly) or use some ND grad filters.
>> Anonymous
>>183630
to be honest, i never heard of HDR (i googled and read wiki, but i kinda don't know how to "use" it)
:/
>> $19.99 !OSYhGye6hY
Grab photomatix off bittorrent, it has a good tutorial in the program. Also, google AEB.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>183637
take a photo with the sky properly exposed, take another one without moving of the trees/grass properly exposed then stick them together to get both properly exposed.

Basically because a dslr sensor has 1-2 stops dynamic range and our eyes have much larger (10?) we can expose the whole scene "correctly" at once but a dslr would need 5 different goes and merged together to do it correctly.
>> Anonymous
>>183640
oh, i think it'll be hard to make one pic out of it (cuz theres no border). what i mean is that it will be hard for ME :/
anyway, i'll try.

beside this and filters, is there no other way? even for only a bit improvement?


>>183639
ah i think my cam actually can do this LOL
now i know what is meant by "+0.3EV" or something on taking batch images
anyway, thanks for the answers everyone :)
>> Anonymous
problem partially solved:
my cam really has this feature (i dunno if its normal, i'm happy to have this option anyway)

it takes 3 pics with different exposure (or is it something else?) and the difference can set to be 0.3EV, 0.7EV and 1.0EV. with the latter i got a nice result, i have to take the pics with a tripod though to have less work later on my computer.
>> Anonymous !PIDjsjVC82
bracket if you haz tripod. ND grad filter halps if you no haz tripod.
>>183653
That is exactly what we are talking about - the feature is known as AEB, or automatic exposure bracketing. It takes the pictures with 3 different exposure settings, and it'll be up to you to combine them properly.

The combined image is referred to as an HDR image, or high dynamic range. It is supposed to look more like what the human eye would see.

Properly done, it can produce a very good looking image and give you flexibility in emphasizing desirable elements (should you desire).

I kin haz examplez in a few.
>> Anonymous !PIDjsjVC82
     File :-(, x)
examplez: omg lol wtf too brite lrn2 exopz lulz

(but the bottom half is actually quite nice)

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTiCamera SoftwareDigital Photo ProfessionalImage-Specific Properties:Pixel CompositionRGBImage OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution350 dpiVertical Resolution350 dpiImage Created2008:05:16 12:50:26Exposure Time1/500 secF-Numberf/1.4Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/1.4Exposure Bias1 EVFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length50.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1000Image Height667RenderingNormalExposure ModeAuto BracketWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous !PIDjsjVC82
     File :-(, x)
examplez: lol too dark go get falsh n00b

(but the top half is really pretty close to what I want)

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTiCamera SoftwareDigital Photo ProfessionalImage-Specific Properties:Pixel CompositionRGBImage OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution350 dpiVertical Resolution350 dpiImage Created2008:05:16 12:50:26Exposure Time1/2000 secF-Numberf/1.4Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/1.4Exposure Bias-1 EVFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length50.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1000Image Height667RenderingNormalExposure ModeAuto BracketWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous !PIDjsjVC82
     File :-(, x)
examplez: lol n00b background is too bright

(yes, it is, since there was about a 5 stop range in the picture. But now we have a subject - the daisy in the middle is properly exposed, so we can combine it with the others)

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTiCamera SoftwareDigital Photo ProfessionalImage-Specific Properties:Pixel CompositionRGBImage OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution350 dpiVertical Resolution350 dpiImage Created2008:05:16 12:50:25Exposure Time1/1000 secF-Numberf/1.4Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/1.4Exposure Bias0 EVFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length50.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1000Image Height667RenderingNormalExposure ModeAuto BracketWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous !PIDjsjVC82
     File :-(, x)
And now a composite one after liek 6 minutes in photoshop - not quite as nice as I'd like because of the large brightness difference between the foreground and background, but not bad.

The larger version will probably work well as a desktop, since I prefer the bottoms of my wallpapers to be darker and low contrast because I have a lot of my icons scattered around there.

In retrospect I probably should have taken a 4th picture with a slightly darker background, but I could probably do a half-decent brightness contrast adjust in photoshop.

I won't, though.
>> Anonymous
>>183733
>>183730
>>183729
>>183728

A for effort
>> Anonymous
>>183733
>>183730
>>183729
>>183728
>>183724
F for talking like a fucking retard.
>> Anonymous !PIDjsjVC82
>>183776
I R flattered u readed it all bcus when i go here i just look @ the pics lol
>> NatureGuy !se3A3TwzdY
     File :-(, x)
You can fake a ND filter in photoshop

make an adjustment layer, curves tends to work best for the sky. Adjust the sky to the point where you want it, ignoring the rest of the photo. Then select the mask in the layers window and paint in the area you want to be adjusted or just use the gradient tool if you're lazy.

In the screen cap are 2 separate adjustment layers for the ground and sky, get it?

Any questions?
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>183724
thanks for the examples :)
i still have to get the pics on my computer and try to get em together into one pic.
>>183798
I just tried to modify the tone curve and it worked out pretty well. i didnt even need a mask.
this will not work on a high-contrast-pic though because many details in the bright or dark areas are lost when taking the photo.


in the pic you see the basic form of the curve i took (dont ask why i didnt just screencap the real curve..)
>> Anonymous
Whatever you do, make sure it's got plenty of vignette. Also you might want to shoot with a Holga because they really have the coolest pictures.
>> Anonymous
>>184211
listen to this man, he seroiusly noes what he's talking about
>> Anonymous
>>184211
>>184214
where did this come from?
random bull shit like this doesnt hurt anyones feelings
but yeah troll
>> Anonymous !PIDjsjVC82
     File :-(, x)
>>184236
yeah, posters like
>>183767
>>183776
>>184211
>>184214
are exactly why I don't post my stuff here often. No suggestions, no actual criticisms, just "shit sux" or "needs moar Holga, the best camera evar hurrrr"

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTiCamera SoftwareDigital Photo ProfessionalImage-Specific Properties:Pixel CompositionRGBImage OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution350 dpiVertical Resolution350 dpiImage Created2007:07:05 15:22:47Exposure Time1/1250 secF-Numberf/7.1Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating200Lens Aperturef/7.1Exposure Bias0 EVFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length55.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1000Image Height667RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
>>184261
shit sux
>> Anonymous
>1-2 stops dynamic range

A little point and shoot has more than that, Butterfly.
>> Anonymous
>>183640Basically because a dslr sensor has 1-2 stops dynamic range

lol, guess you don't know your beloved a100 as much as you think

"The Sony DSLR-A100 produced a fairly standard 8.1 EV (just over eight stops) of dynamic range between ISO 100 and 400, this dropped to around 7 EV at ISO 800 and 6 EV at ISO 1600."
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>184270
>>184344
K
Last chart i saw indicated it was 1-2 stops. I didnt save it otherwise id repost it now. <3
>> Anonymous
>>184344
Manufacturers may claim 8+ stops of dynamic range, but from personal experience I suspect that is some sort of lab-contrived figure. Realistically I'd say I normally get about four stops of usable data from a D2x raw file. I think the difference comes from the shadows: manufacturers measure the point at which recoverable shadow detail completely disappears (clipping) as the lower limit of dynamic range, whereas I would consider the lower limit to be the point at which the recoverable shadows become too noisy to use.

>>183798
That's not really faking an ND filter. Effectively an ND filter compresses your input levels while curves compress your output levels. They may appear to have the same effect, but curves only work when there is data to work with in the first place. In a situation like OP's, there would be no data to adjust because the sky is clipped. The obvious solution is to expose for the sky and apply curves to bring out shadows, but this can cause problems with high dynamic range scenes because the shadows will be too dark and any attempt to recover them will lead to a noisy, muddy mess.

A graduated ND filter or HDR are the only ways to handle the situation the OP specified.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
oh hey guys

did someone say dynamic range?
>> Anonymous
>>184399
QFT, such a shame that no-one else has used it/fuji wont share as its a pretty lucrative technology for not only wedding shooters but pretty much every digital shooter who knows about DR etc...

do want, but am already with canon... the one thing i dont like about them :(
>> Vincent !!8LCSE0Zp1mL
>>184429
Ya I came REALLY close to buying a Fuji S5, over the D200 I picked up. Main reason I didn't is because of the FPS difference. However I have a feeling the S5 was more the camera for me anyway..

Oh well the D300 (that I will probably get soon) IMO is very very close to as good as the S5 is for Color rendition. Not sure about DR though
>> Anonymous
>>184462
what fps is the s5?

personally i could live with it as honestly i rarely, RARELY use 5fps on my 30D, its nice knowing i have it, but not essential :S

the other pain is that the s3 and even the s5 can be had fairly cheaply now-a-days, especially considering people dont realise how special they are.

seriously, if they came in canon!!!... :(
>> Anonymous
>>184470
Problem with the S3 is bad viewfinder coverage- 87%, the worst of any DSLR ever made. The S5 has a more conventional 95%. (Of course, there's no reason for an SLR, especially a DSLR, to not have 100%, but that's neither here nor there. 95% is average; 87% is horrific.)
>> Anonymous
>>184486
lol shit thats pretty bad for the s3...
>> Anonymous
OP here, I got one question now:

How much does a 'good' ND filter (58mm) cost?
(what i mean is that the filter should NOT be shit, but not too expensive either)

Also, if I use that filter, do I have to use a longer exposure time or higher iso to have the pic brigh enough?