Did I expose these D2X pics correctly?

Hi Steve,

The cat - hard to say. See those reddish spots lacking detail on bright white? That can be result of overexposure, wrong white balance, or inappropriate raw conversion.

The shop photo - IMHO underexposed. How much more details would you loose if you exposure would be higher?

In any case, conversion plays an important role.

Very whimsical camera  

 

Steve,

My take on the first one is that you were in a no-win situation without your flash. I don't see how you could go with less -EV. I mean, the window looks like it is *glowing*.... :? I think you did about as well as could be on that one, considering that you didn't have your flash.

Regards,

Frank

 

Dear Steve,

Let me ride my favorite horse a little...

Non-optimal image can be resulting not only from wrong exposure, but from wrong processing, wrong white balance (especially with D2x), and/or wrong tonal curve.

It's hard to say how much noise will you gain in boosting shadows on the shop shot, and how much highlights can you preserve in processing the lighter part of it.

It is also hard to say whether it is possible to compensate for false colours in the highlights near the cat's nose.

May I say that both of these photos are pretty close to what I think is good tonal distribution. I'm sure we need to gain more experience with this camera - especially in terms of exposure and white balance. Also, more NEF processing efforts are needed to et the best out of the shots.

New metering Nikon have in this camera seems to be tricked pretty easy with bright spots in the scene, as if hardware designers presumed more dynamic range from the sensor then Capture/in-camera processing is getting.

Looking at the histogram of RAW data from D2x, I see that in a lot of cases channels make a sharp spike at the left, with absolutely perpendicular right front. This sort of histogram rules highlight recovery out completely. What makes me wonder that this effect is not something consistent. Looking at the scene and setting the exposure, I can't predict the histogram with the certainty I'm accustomed to. So, more shooting, more bracketing, and more analysis.

 

Re: Good thing these were just test shots, huh?

No Kidding!! I wish that I could find a way to make a few $$ from this great hobby. I'm not looking for a career change, but my wonderful wife Janie would be real happy if I could find a way to help pay for some of this danged equipment....    

Good luck on this one. Sounds like it could be a lot of fun.

Frank

 

On your first image about the only way to make it work is to expose for the window and then use your SB800 to correctly expose for the rest. The cat seems to be exposed properly to me.

 

Agreed, fill light is needed here.

 

Well, I wanted to play with the golf shop since that is the kind of real shooting work I have to do. Windows like that drive me crazy but sometimes it is possible to work them in using the light for effect and most of all watching your composition. Given that I was playing with a processed file, I spent all of 20 seconds playing with it.

Before

After

 

Well done Larry.

 

Thanks, Gordon! As I have indicated before I do very little post processing so that is a weak area for me. I depend on getting the shots out of the camera. In this instance I used the technique that I recently described in the Technical Forum.

 

Re: Good thing these were just test shots, huh?

I can almost relate: My wonderful wife Melanie told me when I wanted to buy the Sigma 800 that it was a good idea; better the photgraphy as a hobby then hanging around in bars  

 

Re: Good thing these were just test shots, huh?

Andreas,

Let me paint the real world scenario.... 8)

I was in my office the other day (browsing the Café of course....;-)), when I heard this awful screaming coming from Janie's office. When I ran in there, she was squeezing the tar out of a poor defenseless penny....LOL :lol: :lol:

My life.... :wink:

Frank

PS - If she ever reads this forum, I'm a dead man.... :?

 

My opinion on shots like this is no matter how much post processing and NEF manipulation you do there is only so much that can be done when both ends of the dynamic range have been breached or 'clipped' like this. You really have to do more work to control or work with the light at the time of the shot - go back to the location when its twilight out or use some studio flash as has been suggested to balance out the scene. You can also try multiple exposures on a tripod. I know these things arent always possible so then you just have to decide which is more important to you - shadow detail or highlight detail.