Photography 101 a BYC taught class *NEW Lesson on Pg. 21*COLOR*

[Carols Clucks]

If your camera will display a histogram, even some point and shoots, you can tell if your image will be blown out (too much info on the right side of the histogram) vs under exposed (too much info on the left side)

 

[FourPawz]

Quote:
Blown out, or overexposed images, will have so much light in them that parts of the image won't have detail due to the excess of light. Too much light literally overwhelms the sensors in that area of the picture.

http://www.gimp.org/tutorials/Blown_Out_Highlights/

An underexposed photograph will be too dark.

http://www.curvemeister.com/tutorials/misfortunate/Underexposed.htm

 

[Kassaundra]

Quote:
Blown out, or overexposed images, will have so much light in them that parts of the image won't have detail due to the excess of light. Too much light literally overwhelms the sensors in that area of the picture.

http://www.gimp.org/tutorials/Blown_Out_Highlights/

An underexposed photograph will be too dark.

http://www.curvemeister.com/tutorials/misfortunate/Underexposed.htm

The cat pic, all that work and I like the first pic better, I thought the "fixed" image of the cat washed out the details in the cat and branches.

 

[Two Creeks Farm]

Part of the issue is the size of the image in the cat link above. I agree, the highlights needed attention, but its very hard to tell exactly what detail was being lost in the cat by it being a tad darker. Its easy to see the affects of the highlights and the changes made....thats why I wanted to see a larger image of fourpawz image above. Many times, a smaller image will hide a myriad of issues. Sometimes making it smaller will create issues on its own...anyones head spinning yet LOL!

 

[FourPawz]

Quote:
Chuckle. my Flickr avatar is a case in point. It's 2 sandwiched negatives (that took probably $40 in today's prices for silver gelatin paper in order for me to get a decent print) and I scanned it on the all-in-one scanner we had at that point in time. It looks pretty darn good in avatar size.

One of these days I need to break down and have it rescanned on a pro machine.

 

[animalloverabh]

 

[babymakes6]

BEAUTIFUL sky!

 

[Kassaundra]

These are sky pics I took yesterday for this assignment. There was only this one cloud in the sky, the pics aren't of anything pretty that I would normally have photographed, but it was the ONLY thing in the sky except the sun! lol

All pics were taken in apeture priority w/ diff shutter and f stops, all in iso 200 (my camera's default) I can change it but didn't realize until later that it didn't change on it's own.

f-5, 1/1000 sec shutter

f-16, 1/125 sec shutter

f-32, 1/25 sec shutter

This is the first pic, but w/ a very quick run through photoshop.

I was suprised at how little difference there was in photos. Is that b/c everytime I would change the f-stop the camera changed the shutter speed so that it continued to be the same ratio?

In full resolution the pics aren't that "paint by numbers" looking.

 

[Two Creeks Farm]

Kass..pretty much correct. The 125/f16 image is basically 1 full stop over exposed at iso 200. The old sunny 16 rule was based on iso 100 and was a general starting point for sunny outdoor images. 1/250/f16 would have had you really close to start a base exposure.

When you guys take the images, you need to be in manual mode if possible. That way the shutter speed is set (by you) and the changes will be visable when you make the aperature adjustments. You can also use Aperature mode where you set the aperature and change the shutter for the changes to be seen, but manual in all honesty is where you want to be, that way you start developing how to set the exposure without input from the camera(except for the meter)


Here is a quick example of all this in action

Walking through the pits, I saw one of the companies that pays me to shoot for them. A quick shot in Shutter Priority netted me the first image

A quick look at the histogram showed it was underexposed (dark) so a quick +.07 adjustment using exposure compensation was added and the second image was taken.

Better, and I could have stood there and fiddled some more but the image is more for record then quality so it will suffice. Post process could easily clean it right up. Total time was literally a few seconds to make the change. Even though I shoot in RAW, I refer to still get as close as possible.

 

[Amyable]

When I was uploading the pics to my computer, it cleared the images off my camera and I can't go back and look at the settings I used.

So, I will guess. I was fiddling with the ISO mainly. I like the second pic better.
ISO 400

ISO 200