| I headed out this evening at 7 pm with my D3100 in lovely evening sunshine (odd for Northern Ireland) to try out some shutter priority shots at the local salmon weir, i.e. weir, tree reflecting on pool above weir, lovely blue sky behind (approx 2/5 of view). Used my 50mm f1.8 AF-S. Tried Auto to get indicative readings before going to manual. Selected 2 secs and highest F (22) at ISO 100. Guess what? Blown. I tried all sorts. Thing is if I moved below 2 secs the water would not blur so it had to stay. Could not reduce ISO. Camera would not give me more than f22 (though fleetingly I saw f35 which disappeared almost instantly. Changing to my kit lens 18-55 f4-5.6 saw a little improvement but the sky was so pale, tree and background greenery washed out even at 1/2 sec   . I don't yet know enough to get into filters, nor do I know enough about Adobe (I have NX viewer2 and Gimp). What am I doing wrong. Big learning step here for me. Help would be appreciated. Do I need filters and if so which?PS I have reduced the size of the photos. I don't yet know how to add metadata as I am a total newcomer to the site. |
Overexposed?
- Thread starter Poolkas
- Start date
Don Kuykendall_RIP
RIP :(
This is a candidate for HDR.. At least shoot at least three or more shots of each going down one stop, then two stops the go up onr stop and then two stops.
Camera Maker: NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model: NIKON D3100
Image Date: 2012-04-12 18:06:12 (no TZ)
Focal Length: 18.0mm (35mm equivalent: 27mm)
Aperture: f/22.0
Exposure Time: 0.400 s (1/3)
ISO equiv: 100
Exposure Bias: -1.67 EV
Metering Mode: Matrix
Exposure: Manual
Exposure Mode: Manual
White Balance: Auto
Flash Fired: No
Orientation: Normal
Color Space: sRGB
GPS Coordinate: undefined, undefined
Software: Ver.1.01
seeing how you shot this looks like you were trying to soften the water? Show movement? Study up on HDR. (Google it) now sure what software you have or if you can do it.
Camera Maker: NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model: NIKON D3100
Image Date: 2012-04-12 18:06:12 (no TZ)
Focal Length: 18.0mm (35mm equivalent: 27mm)
Aperture: f/22.0
Exposure Time: 0.400 s (1/3)
ISO equiv: 100
Exposure Bias: -1.67 EV
Metering Mode: Matrix
Exposure: Manual
Exposure Mode: Manual
White Balance: Auto
Flash Fired: No
Orientation: Normal
Color Space: sRGB
GPS Coordinate: undefined, undefined
Software: Ver.1.01
seeing how you shot this looks like you were trying to soften the water? Show movement? Study up on HDR. (Google it) now sure what software you have or if you can do it.
I agree with Trac... This image is a good candidate for HDR
Photoshop CS5 has HDR processing, but you can get a free trial version of Photomatix (good for 30 days) at HDR photography software & plugin for Lightroom, Aperture & Photoshop - Tone Mapping, Exposure Fusion & High Dynamic Range Imaging for photography After that you have to pay for it, but it's good to practice with.
Photoshop CS5 has HDR processing, but you can get a free trial version of Photomatix (good for 30 days) at HDR photography software & plugin for Lightroom, Aperture & Photoshop - Tone Mapping, Exposure Fusion & High Dynamic Range Imaging for photography After that you have to pay for it, but it's good to practice with.
Way overexposed indeed. Your picture's exif shows .4 second @ f22 with an iso of 100. Now the sunny 16 rule would say that for a 100 iso you should be using 1/100 sec (.01 sec) at f16. Since you were at f22, you should have been around 1/50th sec which would be .02 sec. I noticed that you were on manual exposure. I think you did something wrong unless this was the result you were looking for. Was it?
miknoypinoy
Senior Member
I think you need neutral density filters for shooting slower shutter speeds in bright scenes like that. you were trying to get a nice flowing water shot thus the longer shutter speed? (edit. . sorry just read your post again and that's what you were trying to do. lol) I'm just guessing here. may be someone with more experience could add more to this. none the less they look great. a little post processing could probably tighten them up. .
Last edited:
When I first started shooting my camera's fastest shutter speed was 1/500...I wanted to make bokeh and all I had was a 50/2.8 and 100 speed film...I found that even in the shade of a tree during the daylight hours I was over exposed at 1/500 and 2.8 wide open...the only solution was a ND filter...
Here's one I did a while back , HDR waterfall, for example.
The first with slow shutter speeds, the second "normal" speeds
Attachments
Last edited:
Nikon matrix metering often has a bad habbit of over exposing in bright contrasty conditions.
Try using your spot meter or centre weighted and use AE lock in such conditions.
Also, the lens is going perform rather badly stopped down to F22. Try not to go past F16 !
I dont know if you shot JPG or RAW either, but shooting RAW would give you far better control
of putting detail in the highlights and shadow areas.
The only way of getting long shutter speeds in such bright conditions is as been said and using neutral density filters.
A tripod will obviously be nesercary here too. To make things even more steady, once on the tripod use your self timer.
Happy shooting !!!!!!
Try using your spot meter or centre weighted and use AE lock in such conditions.
Also, the lens is going perform rather badly stopped down to F22. Try not to go past F16 !
I dont know if you shot JPG or RAW either, but shooting RAW would give you far better control
of putting detail in the highlights and shadow areas.
The only way of getting long shutter speeds in such bright conditions is as been said and using neutral density filters.
A tripod will obviously be nesercary here too. To make things even more steady, once on the tripod use your self timer.
Happy shooting !!!!!!
They just do not look real to me
yes these are a bit extreme with effect, but it shows the effect HDR has on the water.
AperturePriority
New member
Phil,
I know what you meant here: the HDR software cannot fix really well for different shots of moving subjects. That makes you see the finals look like to get achromatic color, even the originals are shot at very small apertures.
Now that does look real. Nice
Thanks! it was a lot of work to use the HDR and not have it come out looking surreal. But the tone range necessary to convey the image I saw necessitated the use of HDR. Unfortunately you can still see some halo on the rocks.
In some cases I really like the surreal look of HDR. I think Cnyram's second image is very nice.
Hi. Thanks for the comments. However I am doing a photography course and we were told to get out and try various things including shooting a waterfall (salmon weir in this case) using slow shutter, to get a milky effect. Slow shutter, low ISO and small aperture were intentional. Also we were instructed to try to get away from the auto modes if possible.