 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Film Photography / 35 mm / May 2005page 2a of my site
i have shots taken using my 550ex unit. boy on fathers knee. The caption asks for feedback on whether the exposure is correct. It looks a little dark to me. The next portrait is brighter maybe too bright. Advice please alan, anika etc.. SNIP > Advice please alan, anika etc.. Link? Bart > SNIP >> Advice please alan, anika etc.. > > Link? > > Bart http://www.ian-lincoln.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/ sorry bart. I have posted this a week or so ago. Got no feedback except counter registers 270 hits. >>SNIP >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > sorry bart. I have posted this a week or so ago. Got no feedback except > counter registers 270 hits. A real problem with back light in all these shots. There is a function in Photoshop Elements called "fill flash" and in Photoshop CS one called "shadow/Highlights" which will fix this problem in these pictures. Next time, see if you can get away from shooting into the sun. No flash known to man can overpower the sun so instead of fighting it, try to harness it. Without Exif data or at least some technical specs, you won't get much advise on these. You did use a camera, I presume, it would be nice to know the make, model, aperture, ISO etc. It seems to me that you are probably using matrix metering where nothing is exposed correctly but everything is exposed for the highlights. You could knock off some contrast, meter more concentrated on the subject... Who cares if the background is under exposed? and as I already said, use Photoshop if all else fails. The lighting doesn't seem all that much worse than we get in Australia, I used a Canon 20D and 70~200 f2.8 with a 1.4 multiplier to get this shot: http://www.tecphoto.com.au/sports-people.htm It had some of the back light symptoms of your shots but I corrected them with Photoshop.  SignatureDouglas... It's traditional, painter's use it, Rembrandt used it. Now you can put your photos on it too! http://www.canvasphotos.com.au >>>SNIP >>> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Photoshop Elements called "fill flash" and in Photoshop CS one called > "shadow/Highlights" which will fix this problem in these pictures. I got severely burned without a hat or sun cream. Even after only 90 mins. The 70-200F4L has a huge hood on the front. I didn't use sports mode this time. I used av and set that to F4. As it was very bright i set the iso to 100. Was still getting shutter speeds of 1/500 sec minimum usually 1- 2000. Being a 300D i have no control over metering options or focusing mode. I set the focusing point to centre. I have been considering updating to the 20D. Spot metering, servo focusing and 5 fps. > Next time, see if you can get away from shooting into the sun. No flash > known to man can overpower the sun so instead of fighting it, try to > harness it. Time of day and oreintation of the pitch meant that if the play went one way only peoples backs or shooting in the sun. The L lens is darn site heavier than the other lens. It didn't seem so but i couldn't actually hand hold for 90 mins i got cramp. I've been looking around for the seperate tripod mount collar. Apparently the black version that fits a different focal length fits but is cheaper. > Without Exif data or at least some technical specs, you won't get much > advise on these. You did use a camera, I presume, it would be nice to know [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > http://www.tecphoto.com.au/sports-people.htm It had some of the back light > symptoms of your shots but I corrected them with Photoshop. All shots were unprocessed. Shot from jpeg not raw. Default parameters. > SNIP > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Bart Ian, Re-post please I don't see the original. >i have shots taken using my 550ex unit. boy on fathers knee. The caption >asks for feedback on whether the exposure is correct. It looks a little >dark to me. The next portrait is brighter maybe too bright. Advice please >alan, anika etc.. Sports shots lack impact without visible emotion, which is why if you open the newspaper to the sports section what you are going to see is athlete's faces with expressions on them...expressions of joy, pain, sadness. Grab a couple of copies of Sport's Illustrated for some of best examples of sports photography in the world. (Or supermodels in tiny swimsuits) >>i have shots taken using my 550ex unit. boy on fathers knee. The caption >>asks for feedback on whether the exposure is correct. It looks a little [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > best examples of sports photography in the world. (Or supermodels in > tiny swimsuits) hard to get closer with the 70-200F4L. Used to get closer with the 70-300 but images soft at that point. > i have shots taken using my 550ex unit. boy on fathers knee. The caption > asks for feedback on whether the exposure is correct. It looks a little > dark to me. The next portrait is brighter maybe too bright. Advice please > alan, anika etc.. http://www.ian-lincoln.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/1116626540.jpg Assuming the 'whites' on the boy's hat were white-white, then yes the image is underexposed a little. http://www.ian-lincoln.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/1116626623.jpg The second similar image is better wrt exposure. Both images are 'muddy' and it's hard to tell if this is the images or the scanning that is at fault. Both images have a gold colored reflection on the gents head and I wonder what caused that ... was there a gold colored plaque above his head somwhere? If the ceiling (or nearby wall) is white that you use it as a bounce surface. This will even out the lighting in depth. That is one strength of powerful flashes like the 550 ... use for bouncing. Using TTL flash requires that you really understand your camera and flash in terms of metering the flash return (ctr-wtd v. matrix v. spot) and how the metered area reflects the flash light. The systems are pretty good but do not account for the color of clothing. (Although this issue probably doesn't apply in the these cases. With negative film don't be afraid to over rate it (set ISO setting 2/3 to a stop low), which will result in slightly higher exposures. Try a 'people' film like Portra 160NC/VC rated at ISO 100 or the Fuji NPS (160) or NPH (400). Likewise, overexposure is recomended (2/3 of a stop). Cheers, Alan Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. >> i have shots taken using my 550ex unit. boy on fathers knee. The >> caption asks for feedback on whether the exposure is correct. It looks a [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Both images are 'muddy' and it's hard to tell if this is the images or the > scanning that is at fault. 300D so don't think it was the scanning. > Both images have a gold colored reflection on the gents head and I wonder > what caused that ... was there a gold colored plaque above his head > somwhere? Just above and behind is a 3 bulb light fitting, with a sort of crystal glass cover on each bulb. The actual fitting is brass with a lantern light effect. Even candle shaped bulbs. As for exposure i used the * button which is for taking a preflash. I hoped this would set up the auto gubbins inside but maybe i should have held the button down. The preflash also helped the focusing. > If the ceiling (or nearby wall) is white that you use it as a bounce > surface. This will even out the lighting in depth. That is one strength [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > but do not account for the color of clothing. (Although this issue > probably doesn't apply in the these cases. I had an old £15 miranda gun on a 50 year old halina. That seemed better than this system and my previous one of canon a1 and small speedlite. I also had a huge vivitar 770 hammer head, but even with hotshoe sensor set to narrow and the head zoomed to tele it exposed people nearest and not what the camera pointed at. This is when i decided i needed the ttl flash that the a1 didn't have. The t90 back then was almost as dear as the 50E. I was completely sold on the eye focusing and traded up. > With negative film don't be afraid to over rate it (set ISO setting 2/3 to > a stop low), which will result in slightly higher exposures. > > Try a 'people' film like Portra 160NC/VC rated at ISO 100 or the Fuji NPS > (160) or NPH (400). Likewise, overexposure is recomended (2/3 of a stop). I bought the 550ex cos of the flash exposure compensation not the power. Its the only way flash comp is possible on the 300D. However pressing the + and - buttons does sod all. Getting the flash sync speed of 1/200 is impossible even in full auto. The flash exposes to its the cameras own meter and not the aperture and shutter i would prefer. REally don't know if this flash is misbehaving or i'm pressing the wrong button. rtfm i suppose but it all seems unnecessarily complicated. I used to feel more comfortable with my miranda or the hammer head. REading the reviews a 20D or 350D and the 580 on fully auto would solve all the problems but who knows. I'd prefer a better solution than throwing more money at the problem. i've left myself wide open here i do hope i get some useful advice. Fortunately my kill file is primed and ready. > "Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreeLunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > 300D so don't think it was the scanning. Sorry, that wasn't clear, and given your other posts regarding film... If that't the case, then I think there are two things you can do immediately to help 1) Shoot ceiling bounce 2) Shoot ISO 400 >>Both images have a gold colored reflection on the gents head and I wonder >>what caused that ... was there a gold colored plaque above his head [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > this would set up the auto gubbins inside but maybe i should have held the > button down. The preflash also helped the focusing. If it's a digital SLR, then pre-flash should be implicit / automatic. Check the manual. >>If the ceiling (or nearby wall) is white that you use it as a bounce >>surface. This will even out the lighting in depth. That is one strength [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > the a1 didn't have. The t90 back then was almost as dear as the 50E. I was > completely sold on the eye focusing and traded up. I think you're making things more complex than they are... >>With negative film don't be afraid to over rate it (set ISO setting 2/3 to >>a stop low), which will result in slightly higher exposures. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > the 580 on fully auto would solve all the problems but who knows. I'd > prefer a better solution than throwing more money at the problem. Shoot flash shots in M mode. The flash TTL system should behave the same way. Select a reasonable aperture (f/5.6 - f/8) and max sync speed (1/200 s if that's what the manual says) and away you go. Try it at ISO 400 as well as 100, 200 this way. Cheers, Alan Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. >> 300D so don't think it was the scanning. > > Sorry, that wasn't clear, and given your other posts regarding film... > If that't the case, then I think there are two things you can do > immediately to help > 1) Shoot ceiling bounce > 2) Shoot ISO 400 >>>Using TTL flash requires that you really understand your camera and flash >>>in terms of metering the flash return (ctr-wtd v. matrix v. spot) and how [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >>>(160) or NPH (400). Likewise, overexposure is recomended (2/3 of a >>>stop). I've gone digital now. If i ever go commerical i may go back to film. But i can experiment at my leasure with digital and once i get it right i would then do film. I will have lots of feedback via exif data of what i did right and wrong, i can bracket like mad experiment and only print the winning image. My current experiments with overriding flash and going auto everything haven't been good. I'm not sure if its user error or wether my flash isn't entirely reliable. Had especially bad problems when using a jessops extension cord. I bought an off camera flash mount too. >> I bought the 550ex cos of the flash exposure compensation not the power. >> Its the only way flash comp is possible on the 300D. However pressing [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > Cheers, > Alan > i have shots taken using my 550ex unit. boy on fathers knee. The caption > asks for feedback on whether the exposure is correct. It looks a little > dark to me. The next portrait is brighter maybe too bright. Advice > please alan, anika etc.. Try using the FEL button on your camera. It looks like this: (*). The 550EX is a reasonably good flash, but I found that unless I used the FEL function on the D60, I would get a lot of exposure variation, particularly with mid-tones and colour replication. Don't seem to be having any of those problems with the Nikon SB-800 and D70 though... Signature? |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.