Auto Exposure Bracketing vs Post processing

[cauger61]

Sanjib,

You can address the problem with the tonality controls in Lightroom or Photoshop if you use them--in Lightroom, the "basic" panel sliders and the tone curve, and in Photoshop, the curve and levels adjustments. None of these other things are relevant for dealing with low dynamic range. They are distracting you from the specific problems in these specific photos.

Dan

OK thats great!! Let me try. But then one more disturbance pls. What precaution and/or settings one should follow in case of such situations so that these issues do not arise at all?

Thnx & regards,

Sanjib

[cauger61]

xpatUSA-ji, sorry for the trouble that you might have faced in finding the "18% grey rule" term in google. I am not as pundit as you in the field of photography, but in my modest attempt I have found one in the google. Pls. find that here and excuse me:

https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rc...kFOXxDs00VSBk8

Thnx and regards,

Sanjib

[Manfred M]

Sanjib - let ne demonstrate, using a practical example of what Dan has written about:

Here is scene I shot a couple of years ago if Pangong Lake in Ladakh. This is what the minimally processed output from my original raw file looks like:





Now after studying the scene and understanding its strengths and weakness, here is the direction I have taken the scene. It still needs a bit more work in getting the textures in the snow the way I want them to look.



No camera in the world would have gotten the second image here. It took several days of work, probably a couple of hours of trying different things to get it to where I wanted. I am going to use a HDRI technique just on the whitest parts of the snow to up the texture there.

Every strong landscape photographer that I know spends a lot of time post-processing their images and they always have. Virtually all the work in this scene involves dodging and burning small local areas to get things looking the way that I want. I've also used a lot of in-process / Creative sharpening in this image. At this point, I have not used any external filters or tools, but I will use them for some specific local areas that I have not been able to get using traditional techniques.

[xpatUSA]

xpatUSA-ji, sorry for the trouble that you might have faced in finding the "18% grey rule" term in google. I am not as pundit as you in the field of photography, but in my modest attempt I have found one in the google. Pls. find that here and excuse me:

https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rc...kFOXxDs00VSBk8

Thnx and regards,

Sanjib

Thanks for the clarification, Sanjib. Now I understand. The "rule" is to do with standard metering where the camera meter assumes that average of every scene is mid-grey and often exposure compensation should be applied.

[rpcrowe]

Sanjib...

If a person used ISO 100 or 200, set the camera in Programmed auto "P" mode and bracketed one stop over and one stop under... I can just about guarantee that one of the images will nail the exposure right on. Generally adding a CPL filter for landscapes improves the drama of the image because (given the angle of the sun to the CPL)...

1. It does reduce the haze
2. It reduces reflections on foliage
3. It darkens the sky which will
a. enhance the clouds
b. reduce the range of exposure needed to cover the exposure range of the shot

Lots of folks balk at using "P" and say that, "To be professional, you need to shoot in manual" My answer to that is whatever gets you a good image is the way to shoot and "P" with a + and - one stop exposure bracketing is just about guaranteed to give you one exposure that is dead on.

[cauger61]

camera meter assumes that average of every scene is mid-grey and often exposure compensation should be applied.

Thats great!! Very well understood and then summerized and further clarified.

Cheers

Sanjib

[cauger61]

Sanjib...

whatever gets you a good image

No that is there always. We say, what is the proof of a tree, it is in the quality of its fruit. Now "good image" is bit of a non-technical term (don't take otherwise}. Here persons like Dan, Manfred don't consider the issue at the centre of my photographs is one of exposure, but one of Dynamic range or rather lack of it. There is lack of variation in tonal ranges implying those are cases of low dynamic range as opposed to commonly used high dynamic range. And both Manfred and Dan are of the opinion that nothing can be done to correct that problem at the camera end and it has to be taken care of in post-processing. My hunch was to know if there was any settings those can be done at the camera level to take care of such low-contrast situations? Their answer is just — NO!! And Dan has shown [#2] that by manipulating my image in the Lightroom and further that has been clarified by Manfred [#23].

[Geoff F]

Sometimes, Sanjib, I will try exposure bracketing on rather 'flat looking' scenes where I know I will need to do a bit of editing work to create some 'pop' to the image and expand the tonal range.

For example, your beach scene has too much movement in the foreground for merging of bracketed shots but a darker sky could be very carefully merged into the scene. Alternatively, I often 'stretch' the range in a single shot by producing two or three conversions from a Raw image then merging them together with masking.

Another method which I sometimes use is to change the Blend Mode. For example, add a Curves Layer but don't initially do anything with it except change the Blend Mode to something like Overlay or Soft Light and adjust the opacity to give a pleasing result. Masking can be used to show or exclude the effect from various parts of the scene.

For me, your trees image fails because of the out of focus foreground, without even considering any of the dull light issues. Similarly, the other beach image is just a wave without any serious subject of interest.

[Manfred M]

Sanjib...

If a person used ISO 100 or 200, set the camera in Programmed auto "P" mode and bracketed one stop over and one stop under... I can just about guarantee that one of the images will nail the exposure right on. Generally adding a CPL filter for landscapes improves the drama of the image because (given the angle of the sun to the CPL)...

1. It does reduce the haze
2. It reduces reflections on foliage
3. It darkens the sky which will
a. enhance the clouds
b. reduce the range of exposure needed to cover the exposure range of the shot

Lots of folks balk at using "P" and say that, "To be professional, you need to shoot in manual" My answer to that is whatever gets you a good image is the way to shoot and "P" with a + and - one stop exposure bracketing is just about guaranteed to give you one exposure that is dead on.

I can almost agree with you Richard, except that when one uses "P" mode one has conceded all control to the camera, which has no idea of what the photographer's intent is, other than to get a reasonably sharp image.

I don't have the same issue with aperture priority or shutter priority, as when using those modes, the photographer has taken one important decision; whether to freeze motion or not in shutter priority and how to manage depth of field with aperture priority. Both are important first steps to becoming a competent photographer.

I use a polarizing filter in a lot of my work and some caution has to accompany your recommendations:

1. When dealing with the sky, maximum polariztion impact occurs when the camera is pointed to a position that is normal (i.e. at 90 degrees) to the sun. Shoot straight at the sun or with the sun right behind you and there will be no impact on the sky when shooting with a polarizer.

2. Using a polarizer with a wide angle lens can introduce "banding" in the sky. This tends to detract from the image.

3. A polarizer reduces the amount of light hitting the sensor. While this effect will vary from filter to filter, but one can expect at least a 1-1/2 stop loss of light. This will require the photographer to adjust the exposure to compensate.

4. Even when the issues mentioned in points 1, 2 and 3 do not occur, undisciplined use of a polarizing filter can result in an unnatural looking sky.

[Manfred M]

My hunch was to know if there was any settings those can be done at the camera level to take care of such low-contrast situations? Their answer is just — NO!! And Dan has shown [#2] that by manipulating my image in the Lightroom and further that has been clarified by Manfred [#23].

There is one thing that the photographer CAN do, and that is to take the picture when the lighting conditions are optimal. Landscape photographers tend to shoot at morning or afternoon "Golden Hour" and "Blue Hour" in order to do this.

In your case, geography is conspiring against you because you live reasonably close to the equator, so your window of opportunity is relatively short to take advantage of these times. The farther you are from the equator, the longer these periods of "good light" last, but one has to be willing to get up early or stay up late to shoot in these conditions.

That does not mean you will get great images straight out of camera; but it does mean you will have more much more suitable lighting conditions to get a strong capture.

[cauger61]

Sometimes, Sanjib, I will try exposure bracketing on rather 'flat looking' scenes where I know I will need to do a bit of editing work to create some 'pop' to the image and expand the tonal range.

For example, your beach scene has too much movement in the foreground for merging of bracketed shots but a darker sky could be very carefully merged into the scene. Alternatively, I often 'stretch' the range in a single shot by producing two or three conversions from a Raw image then merging them together with masking.

Another method which I sometimes use is to change the Blend Mode. For example, add a Curves Layer but don't initially do anything with it except change the Blend Mode to something like Overlay or Soft Light and adjust the opacity to give a pleasing result. Masking can be used to show or exclude the effect from various parts of the scene.

For me, your trees image fails because of the out of focus foreground, without even considering any of the dull light issues. Similarly, the other beach image is just a wave without any serious subject of interest.

OK!! then do you consider the issues of my photographs are one of "composition" or that of "tonal range" or both? Then what do you consider that one can do by manipulating the settings at the camera level? As Manfred opines [#23] that no camera in the world can take care of "dynamic range" issues without the help of post-processing. As with regard to the focusing issues of my "trees image", could that be remedied with AE/AL lock?

[Manfred M]

As Manfred opines [#23] that no camera in the world can take care of "dynamic range" issues without the help of post-processing.

Sorry, you have misunderstood what I have written. My view is that when it comes to landscape photography, it is extremely difficult to the get the strongest possible image, straight out of camera. It is certainly possible to get TONAL range to an acceptable level, straight out of camera. The issues with virtually any existing light landscape photograph is related to localized tonality issues.

Dynamic range is something completely different. It is the camera's ability to capture an image from the deepest shadows to the brightest highlights in one exposure. Tonal range suggests that black areas in the image are shown as being black and white areas in the image are shown as being white.

Your images do NOT have a dynamic range issue, but rather a tonal range issue, as per Dan's edits.

[cauger61]

Dynamic range is something completely different. It is the camera's ability to capture an image from the deepest shadows to the brightest highlights in one exposure. Tonal range suggests that black areas in the image are shown as being black and white areas in the image are shown as being white.

Your images do NOT have a dynamic range issue, but rather a tonal range issue, as per Dan's edits.

Thats great!! OK got it. Let me see, if I can have an experiment in my next shoot out whereby I shall try to have an output which will explicate this difference — tonal range vs dynamic range. Another issue, that I plan to have is — luminosity vs colour, as mentioned by you in post #13. I shall get back with all my garbages to disturb you in my next opportunity.

Thnx u very much.

With regards,

Sanjib

[Manfred M]

Thats great!! OK got it. Let me see, if I can have an experiment in my next shoot out whereby I shall try to have an output which will explicate this difference — tonal range vs dynamic range. Another issue, that I plan to have is — luminosity vs colour, as mentioned by you in post #13. I shall get back with all my garbages to disturb you in my next opportunity.

Thnx u very much.

With regards,

Sanjib

Sanjib - based on what you have written, I am not convinced that you understand the basic concepts yet.

A luminosity histogram is a good place to start - it is a simplified version of what the three colour channel histogram shows you, A luminosity histogram is built on taking ~ 30% of the red channel data, 60% of the green channel data and 10% of the blue channel data and deriving a single histogram out of it.

Dynamic range is a measure of what your camera, at a given ISO setting is capable of recording (i.e. it is a hardware limitation) whereas tonal range is specific to the scene that you are shooting. If there are pure blacks and / or pure whites in the scene you are shooting and they are not showing up as pure blacks and / or pure whites, your tonal range is possibly an issue.

[cauger61]

OK; I will be back and make you convince. Thnx for your patience hearing. With regards,
Sanjib

[xpatUSA]

... There is lack of variation in tonal ranges implying those are cases of low dynamic range as opposed to commonly used high dynamic range. And both Manfred and Dan are of the opinion that nothing can be done to correct that problem at the camera end and it has to be taken care of in post-processing. My hunch was to know if there was any settings those can be done at the camera level to take care of such low-contrast situations? Their answer is just — NO!!

If you shoot only raw, I imagine that is true for most cameras, Sanjib. On the other hand, most cameras allow simple global settings for JPEG output and global contrast can be increased as one of those settings. But then, you get what the camera gives you, whereas leaving it to post-processing allows you to choose from the many different ways to improve contrast to your liking.

Easy to try. Shoot a low-contrast scene three times with in-camera JPEG contrast set to min., default, max. and compare.

Some cameras allow manipulation of raw capture in-camera. Not mine, I am pleased to say (I am old-fashioned, everything is at default in-camera, fix later).

[rpcrowe]

Manfred wrote...

"I can almost agree with you Richard, except that when one uses "P" mode one has conceded all control to the camera, which has no idea of what the photographer's intent is, other than to get a reasonably sharp image."

Manfred, I totally agree with you in that statement but, only when the photographer blindly accepts whatever the camera decides is the correct shutter speed/aperture combination. However, you don't need to do this when shooting in "P" mode anymore than you would in aperture priority, shutter speed priority or manual exposure modes...

The choice between surrendering total control to the camera or using the automation to have a greater control over the image, is the conundrum that prevailed among many photographers when auto focus was first introduced. I missed the entire line of Canon auto focus film cameras because I would not concede that focusing control to the camera. I just "KNEW" that I could do a better and faster job focusing than any dumb machine could do. We all know now that a photographer has the choice when using auto focus whether all control is conceded to the camera or whether the photographer can take control of the focusing to get a better image faster...

I have never shot with a Nikon but, I know that with both Canon and Sony, the photographer has full control over the f/stop. shutter speed and ISO when shooting in programmed mode as well as control over the total brightness of the image. The "P" mode simply gives a quick starting point in determining the exposure.

Obviously being able to choose the ISO gives the photographer control over that facet of exposure...

The photographer can choose any shutter speed or f/stop he or she desires when using the "P" mode...

The total overall brightness/darkness of the image can be controlled using the plus or minus Exposure compensation...

The control over the image is even more in the hands of the photographer when shooting with a camera like the Sony 7D Mark-iii.

1. I can see the results of my exposure choice in the EVF before I shoot
2. I can control the f/stop, the shutter speed and the total exposure compensation with three separate dials all within easy reach of my shooting hand
3. If needed, I can adjust the ISO through the viewfinder.
4. All this time, I can see the results of my choices before I shoot by looking through the EVF. I can even see a histogram in the frame if I so desire. I don't have to chimp to tweak my exposure. Seeing the results through the eye level viewfinder, especially with a histogram in the image is a lot easier than trying to see the image on the LCD in bright sunlight.

Actually, I can't imagine having any more control over the final product than I have in the "P" mode.

However, I will very often shoot in the manual mode when I want to keep my shutter speed and f/stop consistent. I do this a lot shooting sports when I want a specific speed and want a specific amount of DOF. I can control the exposure with auto ISO and can choose the range of exposure at which I am willing too shoot. I can adjust the brightness of the image using the exposure compensation dial. I also do this a lot when I want to shoot portraits with a wide aperture outdoors.

I will always use manual exposure indoors when shooting with studio strobes. I have some older strobes that will only allow me to sync at 1/60 second... I control the exposure using the aperture with help of ISO when I need to make a major adjustment.

[Shadowman]

Richard,

Nikon has a Flexible Program Mode where you can adjust shutter speed/aperture simultaneously where the overall exposure will stay the same; within reason.

[rpcrowe]

Manfred also wrote this totally accurate and succinct comment...

"There is one thing that the photographer CAN do, and that is to take the picture when the lighting conditions are optimal. Landscape photographers tend to shoot at morning or afternoon "Golden Hour" and "Blue Hour" in order to do this."

Selecting the "right" time of day and the right season (because of the angle of the sun is different during the various seasons) will always have a major impact on your image...

Here in Southern California, it is not only the time of day that impacts the contrast of a shot but, the air quality.

I frequently pass a scene viewed from the freeway on my way from our local metro area to my home. It is of a lovely home located on a hillock with distant mountains in the background. Some days that scene is so beautiful that it takes my breath away while at other times it is totally blah. At times this has to do with the time of day (angle of the sun) while other times the air quality also impacts on the scene. Haze and smog will obscure the distant mountains and even the house itself providing a major impact on the quality of the view and of course, impacting any image you could obtain.

I have often thought that this would be a good example to demonstrate what the time of day or season along with air quality can do to and for a landscape image. Unfortunately, there is no safe way to stop along the freeway to shoot this image.

Along those same lines,

I once visited a lake in the state of Utah that was one of the most beautiful vistas I have ever viewed. You rounded a curve in the road and suddenly this lovely lake was in front of you with beautiful mountains rising right behind the lake, unfortunately time constraints did not allow me much time to photograph this beautiful vista... When I obtained my first digital camera, I was excited to revisit the lake and planned my trip so that I would have plenty of photography time to get the most out of my visit...

As I rounded the bend in the road and the lake came into view I was shocked. This was a lake designed for irrigation and when I first visited it, it was in the Spring when the lake was pristine and full. On my next trip, in the Fall, the lake had been drawn down to irrigate farmlands and looked like a mud puddle. What a disappointment.

[cauger61]

Richard,

Nikon has a Flexible Program Mode where you can adjust shutter speed/aperture simultaneously where the overall exposure will stay the same; within reason.

Yes, that comes with a P* in Nikon dslr. This mode comes very handy, when time is short.