What should I have done different with this photo?

[TheBigE]

All,

So going through my photo from my last trip, I came across this image (Some PP done to try and recover Highlights).

At the time of capture, my goal was to capture the tight streets of Barcelona as we took a food tour - as for the results I generally like the compostion but not the exposure.



You can download the images as needed to see Histogram, but it is pretty obvious the sky is blown out. I am sure I rushed through this photo a bit and did not really evaluate the results well enough at the time of capture.

I do have my Highlight Blinkies turned on for my D7200 and I try to review the Historgram as well. Frankly, I cannot remember what I was thinking at the time and most I was trying to catch up to our tour group (I have lost one before..not good). Regardless, I am trying to learn from this photo and determine what I should have done different.

For me this is a good learning opportunity and only helps improve my experience in knowing my equipment and limitations. I need to be able to recogizie this situations quicker and take actions to capture the image I see in my mind. In this case, I believe my only options were to

- Bracket Exposure - 1 stop? 2 Stop
- Shoot with a Monochrome Image in mind for result
- Shoot lower with more ground and less sky.

I welcome any other thoughts or feedback on what I could have done different. Thanks

Thanks in advance.

[george013]

All,

So going through my photo from my last trip, I came across this image (Some PP done to try and recover Highlights).

At the time of capture, my goal was to capture the tight streets of Barcelona as we took a food tour - as for the results I generally like the compostion but not the exposure.



You can download the images as needed to see Histogram, but it is pretty obvious the sky is blown out. I am sure I rushed through this photo a bit and did not really evaluate the results well enough at the time of capture.

I do have my Highlight Blinkies turned on for my D7200 and I try to review the Historgram as well. Frankly, I cannot remember what I was thinking at the time and most I was trying to catch up to our tour group (I have lost one before..not good). Regardless, I am trying to learn from this photo and determine what I should have done different.

For me this is a good learning opportunity and only helps improve my experience in knowing my equipment and limitations. I need to be able to recogizie this situations quicker and take actions to capture the image I see in my mind. In this case, I believe my only options were to

- Bracket Exposure - 1 stop? 2 Stop
- Shoot with a Monochrome Image in mind for result
- Shoot lower with more ground and less sky.

I welcome any other thoughts or feedback on what I could have done different. Thanks

Thanks in advance.

If the dynamic range of the view is bigger as that of the sensor you have to make a choice.
In this case the choise was the street giving blown highlights in the sky. If you went for the sky you would get a dark street. Bring more light in it with PP will result in noise and wrong or vague colors.
Bracketing will need mostly a static subject and tripod.

I gave up paying attention to the sky when it only represents such a little bit in the picture. Unless.....

George

[ajohnw]

Sometimes it's a case of knowing your camera. When highlights are clipped they are gone so if needed the exposure needs setting to capture them. That may leave lower light levels too dark but it's often possible to recover those depending on the degree and the camera.

It's also possible to take 2 exposures one for the scene and one for the sky. Use 2 layers with the sky at the bottom and paint the over exposed area transparent. Some times this can be done from the same raw file. It can be a lot easier than fiddling about trying to bring it all into one.

John
-

[bje07]

Sometimes it's a case of knowing your camera. When highlights are clipped they are gone so if needed the exposure needs setting to capture them. That may leave lower light levels too dark but it's often possible to recover those depending on the degree and the camera.

It's also possible to take 2 exposures one for the scene and one for the sky. Use 2 layers with the sky at the bottom and paint the over exposed area transparent. Some times this can be done from the same raw file. It can be a lot easier than fiddling about trying to bring it all into one.

John
-

This proposal of 2 exposures is easy to realize on a tripod, less if hand held shots.
I suggest bracketing. I use to use it each time the dynamic range is too large (or I think it will be) it is time during PP to merge or not all pictures.

[Mike Buckley]

my goal was to capture the tight streets of Barcelona

Instead of capturing just the tight street, your image also captures the height of the buildings. In my mind, you could have displayed the tight street by eliminating the sky and height of the buildings and by using a square crop. Eliminating the sky would have solved your exposure problem.

[tao2]

Hi Erik,

IMO, the wrong focal length - you're too far away from interesting subjects - they're too far away from you and the folk in the foreground all have their back tae you. If ye crop from this shooting position, ye lose the detailed buildings and have a pretty uninteresting, mostly empty street . Had ye used a much wider lens and got well into the street, about 100 metres farther, then the folk would be the focal points, with the architecture as a backdrop. Or use a long lens tae greatly increase the sense of narrow, tight streets, again with the folk as subjects, not the buildings. Ah think, on this street, the buildings are too close together.

Alternatively, down on one knee, shooting up tae increase converging verticals in the buildings (in B+W), thus , exposing for the sky and solving yer problem...mebbe...

[ajohnw]

This proposal of 2 exposures is easy to realize on a tripod, less if hand held shots.
I suggest bracketing. I use to use it each time the dynamic range is too large (or I think it will be) it is time during PP to merge or not all pictures.

It doesn't really matter if the sky or etc has moved if just that is going to be used in a final image. In fact if this worked out on this shot I would use a slightly reduced size shot of the street so that there wouldn't be any alignment problems.

Looking at the shot full sized though it's pretty clear that the building are blown out as well in places. Blacks clipped too. The blacks may just be down to raw processing,

Bracketing can cope with this sort of problem. I just usually take 2 shots if there are shadows about hand held without moving the camera. I mostly shoot m 4/3 so would have known immediately that the sky was going to be blown,

There has often been debates about bracketing levels and there are various thoughts. Given the dynamic range of many sensors +/-1 is probably not going to be of much use. +/- 2 or even 3 at times is far more likely to be of use. Maybe even more in very extreme circumstances and of course the initial exposure setting needs to be fairly correct as well - to a greater degree than the bracketing.

John
-

[proseak]

Did you shoot in raw?

[bnnrcn]

Have you tried converting to B&W Erik ? It might look better

[MrB]

Erik, your composition is fine for achieving your stated aim - to capture the tight streets of Barcelona. In my view, it needs the height and the distance that you have chosen here, plus the fact that I like those street lamps! If it were mine, I wouldn't bother too much about the sky - it is the street that is important. However, I would bring the sky down a bit from the dazzle zone, and try to process some more colour and contrast into the distant buildings and the tops of the buildings. Hope you don't mind this edit of your post to show the sort of thing I'm trying to suggest:



Cheers.
Philip

[Manfred M]

Erik - now that the image has been taken, there are limited things you can do with it. If you have the raw data, you could see if you can pull out some more detail in the sky, but if you have blown out the highlights, there is little you can do other than substituting sky from another shot in your library, assuming you have the appropriate software and skills to do so.

For future reference (and I know this is not always possible when you are traveling), try to avoid shooting scenes like this during mid-day. The light is generally not "portfolio image quality", so minimizing the amount of sky in an image might be something to think about when you frame your shots. Early morning and late afternoon gives you superior light to work with.

Other techniques of bracketing and then blending images in your editor (can't be done in Lightroom, as you need to work in layers to handle this well), but the question becomes how much time and effort you want to put into the image.

[ajohnw]

There are several free applications about that will merge and align bracketed shots. Results tend to vary according to which one that is used but Qtpfsgui won't produce a typical tone mapped look. I think that there is a commercial version of that around as well.

For simple layer work such as I mentioned the GIMP is perfectly capable of doing that. I understand that the more recent versions now do work to higher bit depths. However providing the images used are well processed into jpg space before merging even the good old jpg bit depth isn't a problem. Like all layer based packages it does have a learning curve but there are plenty of tutorials around.

John
-

[Shadowman]

Try shooting with the sun/light source to your back, even if it isn't your intended composition; usually what's behind you is far more interesting.

[Ken MT]

Looking at the lack of shadows, it probably wouldn't make much difference. It appears that it was bright high cloud. I do agree it pays to look the other way, even of it means crossing the road where the locals drive on the unfamiliar side of the road!

[William W]

For reference EXIF reveals:
> Nikon D7200
> AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED
> F/11 @ 1/40s @ ISO200
> Camera Mode: Aperture-priority AE
> Metering Mode: Multi-segment

***

. . . At the time of capture, my goal was to capture the tight streets of Barcelona as we took a food tour - as for the results I generally like the compostion but not the exposure. . . . I am trying to learn from this photo and determine what I should have done different.
. . . For me this is a good learning opportunity and only helps improve my experience in knowing my equipment and limitations. I need to be able to recognize this situation quicker and take actions to capture the image I see in my mind. In this case, I believe my only options were to
- Bracket Exposure - 1 stop? 2 Stop
- Shoot with a Monochrome Image in mind for result
- Shoot lower with more ground and less sky.

I welcome any other thoughts or feedback on what I could have done different.

If you wanted that particular:
1. Composition
2. Camera Viewpoint
3. Use of Aperture Priority Mode
then Bracketing the Exposure would have been a good idea.

*

A few guidelines for that procedure (typically a daytime scene when one is shooting into the light and with the main subject area being in shadow):

Metering Mode:
“Multi Segment” metering mode on Nikon is very similar to Canon’s “Evaluative”. I am very confident about using Canon and am reasonably familiar with Nikon – in simple terms what that metering mode will do is “try” not to blow the highlights . . . BUT it might be caught out if enough area of the scene is in shadow. I think this is what has happened, but I do not think the sky is blown out by very much.

Shooting into the light:
Always be careful of extraneous light entering the lens and creating Veiling Flare. There is either some Veiling Flare in your image OR there is some air pollution, probably a bit of both because air pollution usually exacerbates Veiling Flare.
Get any filter off the lens.
Use you free hand to shield the lens from extraneous light hitting the front element, especially if you are using a Zoom Lens because the Lens Hood is not very effective on a Zoom Lens, especially a W/A Zoom lens.

Camera Mode:
If you bracket in Aperture Priority Mode (not sure about what impact Auto ISO has, so we will assume Auto ISO is NOT engaged), then the Shutter Speed will change for the Exposure Bracket. Therefore we need to have an eye on the Shutter Speed.
My view is that 1/40s was too slow for that shot anyway. Yes the lens has VR, but a major proportion of the interest is the people contained in the image and several of them present with Subject Motion Blur.

Extent of the Bracket:
Using Aperture Priority Mode (without actively applying Exposure Compensation to each shot), we are dependent upon the accuracy of the Camera’s TTL Meter to interpret the scene as we want it in the final image.
In this case it is better to give the Exposure Bracket a bit of a broader scope, than what we would, if we are using Exposure Compensation or using Manual Camera Mode and calculating our "best guess" as the middle exposure.
From my experience/knowledge of Nikon’s Multi Segment Metering Mode, I think that a bracket ± 1½ Stops would probably be suitable for this shooting scenario, but ±2 Stops would be safer.

***

Rationale/ interrogation of how Nikon’s Multi Segment Metering works in this shooting scenario:

Analysis of the image’s EXIF reveals that the shot was pulled at (approx) 3 stops ‘over exposed’ for the F/16 Rule: (F/16 Rule would dictate F/11 @ 1/400s @ ISO200).

Refer to the hard shadow/sunlight area of building camera right and note that there is still detail in the building facade: although there are areas which are blown out, BUT it seems to my eye (unless that detail has been ‘recovered’ in post), that about 1 Stop LESS exposure would have nailed that detail.


*

Refer to the area of the street where the people are walking and note the SHADOWS – “non distinct soft shadow” which are typical of a Subject at EV 13~12 (F/11 @ 1/100s~1/50s @ ISO200):


So, because they represent a small area of detail within the shot, if those people were 1 Stop underexposed, it would NOT be the end of the world. If they were 2 Stops underexposed, it would be not perfect for a terrific rendition of the detail of them, but it would be manageable to get a good overall image in Post Production.

*

Refer to the sky in the background and also the (lack of) detail of the building facade – I think that much of the lack of detail is Flare or Pollution or more probably both – and I do think that if the shot were pulled at F/11 @ 1/160s @ ISO 200 (- 2 Stops from your exposure) then both the buildings and sky would have been better exposed and there would still have been enough detail in the street and people to bring out in post production.


***

If I were making the shot with my gear I would nave bracketed ± 1 Stops and used Manual Camera Mode and Evaluative Metering Mode. I typically use ±⅓ or ±⅔ Stops and use Exposure Bracketing a lot for “Holiday” images because I make so many images: however I compute the (first) exposure manually based upon my knowledge and experience of the Metering Modes of my cameras. I cannot stress this last point is the most important point

You asked ‘what could I have done differently?’,
And I suggest that Exposure Bracketing would be a good idea,
But critical to Exposure Bracketing is understanding the information that your TTL Meter is providing to you.

This means that your first ‘educated guess’ of the first exposure of the Exposure Bracket will be reasonably close to what you want for the Final Image and the Exposure Bracket will be useful to finesse any oversight or error.

Obviously we cannot expect that we can go out and buy a camera and on day one to begin shooting JPEG’s SOOC with the accuracy of a Reuters’ Staff Photographer. So, at first, and for our practice, the Exposure Brackets should be both wide enough and contain enough exposures to be "safe."

Many Nikon Cameras allow for FIVE Exposure Brackets and if your does, I suggest you do that for the beginning stage.

An Exposure Bracket of ±2 Stops in 1 Stop increments and then REVIEW (on a good monitor NOT on the Camera display) is an invaluable learning method to understand what your TTL Meter is telling you.

***

Here are three examples of my Exposure Brackets in a similar lighting scenario to your image; in each case the first exposure is my estimate.
Then is Bracket is:
Row 1: -⅔ +⅔
Row 2: +⅔ -1
Row 3: +⅔ +1⅓



Note that whilst I had the camera set tor AEB for the shots in Row 1, I did NOT use “AEB” (AUTO Exposure Bracketing) for the shots in rows 2 and 3.
The reason was because I was unsure of what I wanted to do with the final image (particularly how MUCH foreground shadow with lack of detail, to use as a frame for the image – I was really unsure of what I wanted to do and so I used two different framing, using the same Camera Vantage Point, but using different Focal Lengths.

I like using Manual Mode, but the same result can be achieved using Aperture Priority Mode, but for me Aperture Priority Mode is much more cumbersome and also dangerous when the Shutter Speed gets slow.

As one example, if I want to Exposure Bracket ±1⅓Stops and my initial estimate is F/11 @ 1/200s @ ISO 400 . . . BUT if 1/200s is the slowest Shutter Speed that I want to use, then, if I use Manual Mode I can easily pull the second shot at: F/7.1 @ 1/200s @ ISO 400 and the third at: F/11 @ 1/500s @ ISO400 and this is easily done in Manual Mode by spinning the appropriate dials.
On the other hand (for my brain) that function is more complicated and more time consuming if I were using Aperture Priority Mode.

Similarly if I am in Manual Mode it is really easy to make odd Exposure Brackets, like the ones in Rows 2 and 3 (above).

Also, with my camera in Manual Mode I have a ‘visual dial’ (the LED pointer) of the “Exposure Compensation’ I am applying to the TTL Meter’s Reading for my initial “guess” exposure of the forts shot. Using that scale fits my brain better than reading a number and thinking “Exposure Compensation is +⅔ . . . etc”.

*

By the way and for additional info in case it assists you –

In Row 1, I used frame 2 – i.e. my initial guess was ‘wrong’ for what I wanted, so the bracket saved my shot..

In rows 2 and 3 I haven’t yet decided what I want to do, but I am strongly of the view that my initial exposures are what I want to use.

Here is a rough PP made from the JPEG of what I finally want to do with raw file of Row 1, second image (IMG_0518)


Here are some detailed crops. The exposure on the man is just ‘OK’. I wanted him to pale into less significance and initially not be noticed, but hopefully be noticed as an afterthought in front of the building, especially because he is glued to the mobile phone whilst being surrounded by such architecture, beauty and history. On a large monitor the Oranges (the fruit in the trees) really pop out.


WW
Additional Images © AJ Group Pty Ltd Aust 1996~2016 WMW 1965~1996

[george013]

....
Metering Mode:
“Multi Segment” metering mode on Nikon is very similar to Canon’s “Evaluative”. I am very confident about using Canon and am reasonably familiar with Nikon – in simple terms what that metering mode will do is “try” not to blow the highlights . . . BUT it might be caught out if enough area of the scene is in shadow. I think this is what has happened, but I do not think the sky is blown out by very much.
....

Not exactly.
Matrix is dividing the view in several zones and meters the light in each of them. The final exposure is based on these meterings. Nikon says it is searching a database 0f 30.000 pictures but that's of course pure nonsense. They have created an algorithm based on analyses of several pictures. The main point is that if the light has a to big range, the accent is based on the foreground. In this case on the dark street and forget about the sky. So causing clipping sky.
To solve that problem a function has been created: the Active Day-lighting. More attention is paid to the high lights, resulting in changing the exposure for a darker picture and then correcting by in-camera PP. When saving a jpg.

I've done once an experiment with the camera. The middle of the view equal with the horizon with a clear sky. Then turning the camera 180 degrees. So up side down and metering again. Another result.

The bracketing technique is the same as the HDR technique or do I miss something? And how far is this useful with moving objects?

George

[William W]

Not exactly. . . [comparing and contrasting Nikon’s Matrix (Multi-segment) and Canon’s Evaluative Metering Modes]

Hi George,
I agree that the “Matrix” and “Evaluative” Metering Modes are not exactly the same – but I didn’t write that they were - and note that the explanation of "trying not to blow highlights" was simple.

***

However, on these two points below, you seem to be explaining two major differences between the Nikon and Canon metering systems - so my response might assist you assessing actually how similar the two metering modes actually are:

Matrix is dividing the view in several zones and meters the light in each of them. The final exposure is based on these meterings. Nikon says it is searching a database 0f 30.000 pictures but that's of course pure nonsense. They have created an algorithm based on analyses of several pictures. The main point is that if the light has a to big range, the accent is based on the foreground. In this case on the dark street and forget about the sky. So causing clipping sky.
To solve that problem a function has been created: the Active Day-lighting. More attention is paid to the high lights, resulting in changing the exposure for a darker picture and then correcting by in-camera PP. When saving a jpg.

This is similar to the later Canon TTL Metering: viz –

"The Canon 63-zone Dual-layer Metering Sensor (‘Focus, Colour and Luminance’) hints at the fact that the metering system measures colour and luminance data and also analyses the data provided by each point of the AF system. The metering sensor has 63 measurement zones and is a Dual-layer design with each layer sensitive to different wavelengths of light."

"During the exposure reading the cameras look to see which points, in addition to the selected point, have achieved or almost achieved focus. This information lets the cameras know which part of the image is the subject. They then take metering readings from the zones corresponding to the AF points that have achieved (or almost achieved) focus and combine them with readings from all the other zones. This allows for consistent shot-to-shot exposure, even in complex situations."

REF and copyright: Canon Professional Network, Infobank Database
Edited excerpt of paper reproduced under copyright law for educational purposes.

*

I've done once an experiment with the camera. The middle of the view equal with the horizon with a clear sky. Then turning the camera 180 degrees. So up side down and metering again. Another result.

This is the same with Canon TTL Evaluative Metering, and as someone who does use a camera held inverted I am aware that the Evaluative TTL Metering Difference is about 1½ Stops for an outside scene with clear sky when the camera is held upside-down in Landscape Orientation.

***

The bracketing technique is the same as the HDR technique or do I miss something? And how far is this useful with moving objects?

I think you missed something: the purpose of using Exposure Bracketing in the examples above, is to choose ONE image file for Post Production, not to merge more than one image file, as we do in HRDI (High Dynamic Range Imaging).

How is it useful for moving objects? ... although we use only ONE image file, obviously we need to be aware of the the Shutter Speed for EVERY image in then Exposure Bracket, such that the Shutter speed is fast enough to arrest any Subject Motion.

Note that there was mention that I thought 1/40s was too slow for the original image that Erik posted.

Also note that there was mention that, when using Aperture Priority Mode to make an Exposure Bracket special attention must be on the changing Shutter Speeds throughout the Exposure Bracket so that no Shutter speed is so slow that it would make a Subject Motion Blur.

WW

[george013]

The bracketing misunderstanding has been solved then. Just more individual pictures with a different setting where you can choice out one later. My remark of moving objects was given by the idea HDR would be used.

When I wrote "not exactly" I was refering to "in simple terms what that metering mode will do is “try” not to blow the highlights . . ". I don't know what Canon is doing but I believe it's not that much different.

I do state with what I wrote in my first post. If the dynamic range is to big, you must make a choice. Either forget about the blown high lights or adjust the exposure. When the adjusting is not much it might give a good result in pp. If the adjustment is bigger, the result in pp will be worse. With bracketing you just postpone the decision.

If the cloud is equal grey, often a source of clipping, I just forget about it. It doesn't add anything. If there is a structure in it I must decide and sometime take more pictures. But in another way.
On my camera, Nikon D700, I use the AE/AF button for the exposure. Just aiming the camera in a different position will give me another exposure which I can lock. Then I can focus on the subject and keep that fixed to reframe the picture. I'm also able to use the back dial to temporary overrule/correct the exposure.

Back to the image, I do think Erik captured the narrow streets well. His question was about exposure and he came with 3 ideas.

- Bracket Exposure - 1 stop? 2 Stop
- Shoot with a Monochrome Image in mind for result
- Shoot lower with more ground and less sky.

Bracketing is just postpone the decision, it doesn't solve anything.
Monochrome, I don't know about that.
Framing the picture so you don't have those highlights, I think many profs are doing that.

George

[William W]

The bracketing misunderstanding has been solved then. Just more individual pictures with a different setting where you can choice out one later.

OK. Understood.

***

When I wrote "not exactly" I was refering to "in simple terms what that metering mode will do is “try” not to blow the highlights . . ". I don't know what Canon is doing but I believe it's not that much different.

OK. Understood.

***

I do state with what I wrote in my first post. If the dynamic range is to big, you must make a choice. Either forget about the blown high lights or adjust the exposure. When the adjusting is not much it might give a good result in pp. If the adjustment is bigger, the result in pp will be worse. With bracketing you just postpone the decision.

Yes I understand.

But the point of this conversation is about Erik's Image . . . and the Dynamic Range of Erik’s image is not “big” and it is certainly not “too big”. . .

The portion of Sky (at the maximum) is at about EV = 15 and the scene area in the shadow part of the street is at about EV = 12, at the worst EV = 11 (evidenced by the exposure settings that Erik used to make the shot) . . .

The DR of a Nikon D7200 sensor surely can manage a scene DR of 4 Stops. . .

The poorest (the darkest) shadow area in the street would be at about EV = 9

The DR of a Nikon D7200 sensor surely can manage a total DR of 6 Stops. . .

***

Colin Southern (previous Member here), made many posts on exactly this subject: stating religiously and repeatedly that the DR of the Scene is rarely too much for the DR of a modern DSLR to manage.

The method is to get as close to the blown zone as possible for the highlights and then know how to bring up the shadows in Post Production. . .

The DR of in-line images on a web page is about what . . . 5 stops or so, if we want to display the images to their best advantage then we need to compensation for that too before postsing them on websites.

WW

[george013]

OK. Understood.

***



OK. Understood.

***



Yes I understand.

But the point of this conversation is about Erik's Image . . . and the Dynamic Range of Erik’s image is not “big” and it is certainly not “too big”. . .

The portion of Sky (at the maximum) is at about EV = 15 and the scene area in the shadow part of the street is at about EV = 12, at the worst EV = 11 (evidenced by the exposure settings that Erik used to make the shot) . . .

The DR of a Nikon D7200 sensor surely can manage a scene DR of 4 Stops. . .

The poorest (the darkest) shadow area in the street would be at about EV = 9

The DR of a Nikon D7200 sensor surely can manage a total DR of 6 Stops. . .

***

Colin Southern (previous Member here), made many posts on exactly this subject: stating religiously and repeatedly that the DR of the Scene is rarely too much for the DR of a modern DSLR to manage.

The method is to get as close to the blown zone as possible for the highlights and then know how to bring up the shadows in Post Production. . .

The DR of in-line images on a web page is about what . . . 5 stops or so, if we want to display the images to their best advantage then we need to compensation for that too before postsing them on websites.

WW

Thanks for the answer.
I do understand what you try to explain to me/Erik/others. I just must think about the figures. I'm still struggling with this problem. In the past I had discussions like this one and having still examples on the net. I'm using Picasaweb and they stopped a few weeks ago. But the posted pictures I still can reach.
Two pictures nearly as that one of Erik.

1/8, f4.5, iso400



1/250, f4.5, iso 400


A difference of 5 stops. I made them over 5 years ago with the D80. I didn't do any pp.

George