DSLRUsers.com

These seagules are familiar with people and come asking for food. They make good "free" models for practice shots - particular exposure on the white feathers which I have been having problems with.

D70 + AFS 300 F4. 1/400 at f8.

regards,

Arthur

was this handheld?
so how was the white affecting your expoure?

redline wrote:was this handheld?
so how was the white affecting your expoure?

Hi

Yes, shot capture handheld. From the picture you can see the birds' forehead is very white without details. Unlike the areas around the eyes where the details are of the features are nicely rendered. I would like to see some details at the forehead.

regards,

Arthur

yeah just check your highlights when your shooting in direct sunlight and dial down on exp. til you get what you like.

Good shot ....... but are you shooting in raw with auto WB......

big pix

Hi

Thanks. Great idea to use the highlights. I have a question. Will raw save the blown out highlights?

regards,

Arthur

don't think so Arthur,
can't bring back details thats not recorded, loved to be proven wrong though

yummy, can have a few for dinner

If the highlights are truly blown in all three RGB channels you can consider them chopped off and gone forever. It there is some data left in one or more of the color channels you have something to work with and may be able to "fix" your highlights to some a proportional degree.

SoCal Steve wrote:If the highlights are truly blown in all three RGB channels you can consider them chopped off and gone forever. It there is some data left in one or more of the color channels you have something to work with and may be able to "fix" your highlights to some a proportional degree.

Hi

In that case, it is better to underexposed the picture.

regards,

Arthur

Right. You don't want to waste a lot of your shadow detail, but a little underexposure is the definitely preferable to any overexposure.

In situations like this one way to take care of the shot is to spot meter off of the brightest spot (here that would be the forhead). BTW I really like this shot. Would be real keeper if the forehead wasn't blown...

Hi Arthur

yeocsa wrote:Thanks. Great idea to use the highlights. I have a question. Will raw save the blown out highlights?

Possibly, but as a general rule, if the highlights are blown, then they're blown.

Have you tried swapping different curves in underneath the image, using something like Curve Surgery? If you shoot in raw, then you might be able to grab more detail by altering the exposure or underlying curve in your initial PP phases.

Otherwise, the advice the others have given is good, and you'll need to adjust your in-camera exposure to compensate.

Dave,

dooda wrote:In situations like this one way to take care of the shot is to spot meter off of the brightest spot (here that would be the forhead). BTW I really like this shot. Would be real keeper if the forehead wasn't blown...

That depends upon the overall contrast range that the image traverses. In this case, I think there's probably a stop or so to play with.

If the contrast range blows out the highlights too far though, then one needs to look for other means of balancing the exposure; popping the on-camera flash may help for subjects that aren't too far from the camera, but in this case, would that startle the subject and cause it to take flight?

If the gull is anything like those in Bondi or Balmoral, the answer would be "no", but Arthur's gull may be of a more shy, retiring nature.

Gary,
Sorry, what do you mean by contrast range--Dynamic range--or something completely different?
Are you saying that by spot metering off of the brightest spot you may underexpose the rest? Or that spot metering off of the brightest point won't necessarily expose the brightest areas well? Just wondering because this is a strategy I occasionally employ when I'm trying to avoid blown higlights.

gstark wrote:Hi Arthur

yeocsa wrote:Thanks. Great idea to use the highlights. I have a question. Will raw save the blown out highlights?

Possibly, but as a general rule, if the highlights are blown, then they're blown.

Have you tried swapping different curves in underneath the image, using something like Curve Surgery? If you shoot in raw, then you might be able to grab more detail by altering the exposure or underlying curve in your initial PP phases.

Otherwise, the advice the others have given is good, and you'll need to adjust your in-camera exposure to compensate.

Hi

Thanks. I will try your suggestion.

regards,

Arthur

I agree with Dave, spot metering is definitely the way to go when you have high contrast between subject and background; also RAW gives you much more exposure flexibility. Metering on the head may underexpose the background, but it's better than blowing the highlights on your main subject. FWIW it's not blown too badly, the image still works for me.

I neglected to say that it is still a very nice image, yeocsa. The white balance looks a little blue to me, but I don't know my birds so that may just be realistic. No one else mentioned it.

Shoot in Raw and use your Histogram to make sure that you keep your highlights from clipping.

Nice pic Arthur...

What I want to know is: when seagulls spent so much time searching through rubbish bins how do they stay so sparkly white?

I prefer the free models in the aerobics oz style thread

I was also going to say, the shadows look slightly on the blue side on the right hand side.

nice sharp image, makes me want to find my .22

dooda wrote:Gary,
Sorry, what do you mean by contrast range--Dynamic range--or something completely different?
Are you saying that by spot metering off of the brightest spot you may underexpose the rest? Or that spot metering off of the brightest point won't necessarily expose the brightest areas well? Just wondering because this is a strategy I occasionally employ when I'm trying to avoid blown higlights.

A technique I use, is to spot meter off the brightest highlight in which I want to preserve some detail, (forgetting any specular reflections) and give it about +2 - +2.5 stops on the meter. That's a good starting point. (I could call this the zone system, but I won't) Season to taste!

Good luck

kipper wrote:I was also going to say, the shadows look slightly on the blue side on the right hand side.

Hi. I was using AWB. Bluish - from the blue sky?

regards,

Arthur