El patio de atras (The backyard)

[oskiper]

This is a shot from the play "El Patio de Atras" (The backyard)

Camera: Canon 1100D
Lens: 55.250 EFS
Aperture: AF 4,5
Expo: 1/60
ISO: 6400
Focal: 169mm

I can't upload it, so here´s the link to it on my Flickr page
IMG_2060

 

[xenskhe]

That's a good one. I'm viewing it larger; the color temperatures of the various lighting. You are shooting raw right? The green tint on the skintones (the woman in the floral pattern dress - her hairline, forehead); there is some loss of color depth at higher iso it looks like. The light from the box is hot, fluorescent (maybe 5000-5500 kelvin and putting the green tint into that shadow), with a second spotlight on them as well, from in front? (cooler, 3000k). When you get your 6D and can work at higher iso, consider stacking 80a, 82b with an Fl-day filter on something like this, using daylight white balance on camera. The box light may seem too blue, but when you correct the white balance with a dropper tool in the raw conversion the image will look cleaner/clearer I think. The problem with the 80 filters is you loose a stop or two of light.

 

[DanOstergren]

Did you do any editing to this? The contrast seems very high. Is it possible to share the unedited version?

 

[oskiper]

That's a good one. I'm viewing it larger; the color temperatures of the various lighting. You are shooting raw right? The green tint on the skintones (the woman in the floral pattern dress - her hairline, forehead); there is some loss of color depth at higher iso it looks like. The light from the box is hot, fluorescent (maybe 5000-5500 kelvin and putting the green tint into that shadow), with a second spotlight on them as well, from in front? (cooler, 3000k). When you get your 6D and can work at higher iso, consider stacking 80a, 82b with an Fl-day filter on something like this, using daylight white balance on camera. The box light may seem too blue, but when you correct the white balance with a dropper tool in the raw conversion the image will look cleaner/clearer I think. The problem with the 80 filters is you loose a stop or two of light.

Thanks! I'll play with that next weekend with the 6D of a friend.

 

[oskiper]

Did you do any editing to this? The contrast seems very high. Is it possible to share the unedited version?

Yeap, here's the unedited version.

patiodeatras

 

[xenskhe]

Camera: Canon 1100D
Lens: 55.250 EFS
Aperture: AF 4,5
Expo: 1/60
ISO: 6400
Focal: 169mm

It's stating the obvious really; 1/60 is close to as slow as you want to go, f/4.5 is restricting you too. Tamron made a good 135mm f/2.5 lens - manual focus. It's fairly cheap on the used market. You could maybe get this shot at 1600 ISO with such a lens. Better color. Was this shot made using evaluative metering? It's overexposed light on their faces, maybe due to the darkness in the rest of the frame. Do you use spot metering or centre-weighted metering?

 

[oskiper]

Camera: Canon 1100D
Lens: 55.250 EFS
Aperture: AF 4,5
Expo: 1/60
ISO: 6400
Focal: 169mm

It's stating the obvious really; 1/60 is close to as slow as you want to go, f/4.5 is restricting you too. Tamron made a good 135mm f/2.5 lens - manual focus. It's fairly cheap on the used market. You could maybe get this shot at 1600 ISO with such a lens. Better color. Was this shot made using evaluative metering? It's overexposed light on their faces, maybe due to the darkness in the rest of the frame. Do you use spot metering or centre-weighted metering?

Evaluative metering... Actually I've never altered that, I've always used evaluative metering

 

[xenskhe]

If something's back lit, dial in +1 or +2 exposure compensation. If it's front lit you can try -1 or -2. That could make the difference here - one or two stops with the image quality right at useable limits.

I hope you shoot raw in any case, because in many situations you want to overexpose if you can by +2/3 of a stop (or more if possible). The histogram on camera is showing you the JPEG limits but the raw has extra that can be optimised in development. Search on the net for Bob DiNatale optimum exposure. It's a way of getting a better signal to noise ratio.

 

[oskiper]

If something's back lit, dial in +1 or +2 exposure compensation. If it's front lit you can try -1 or -2. That could make the difference here - one or two stops with the image quality right at useable limits.

I hope you shoot raw in any case, because in many situations you want to overexpose if you can by +2/3 of a stop (or more if possible). The histogram on camera is showing you the JPEG limits but the raw has extra that can be optimised in development. Search on the net for Bob DiNatale optimum exposure. It's a way of getting a better signal to noise ratio.

A friend of mine who sold me the camera told me to shoot always in RAW and so I did since the very begining. Unfortunately, I had to learn the hard way that you NEVER have to erase the raw files, I lost all of my first sessions that way.

 

[oskiper]

If something's back lit, dial in +1 or +2 exposure compensation. If it's front lit you can try -1 or -2. That could make the difference here - one or two stops with the image quality right at useable limits.

I hope you shoot raw in any case, because in many situations you want to overexpose if you can by +2/3 of a stop (or more if possible). The histogram on camera is showing you the JPEG limits but the raw has extra that can be optimised in development. Search on the net for Bob DiNatale optimum exposure. It's a way of getting a better signal to noise ratio.

A friend of mine who sold me the camera told me to shoot always in RAW and so I did since the very begining. Unfortunately, I had to learn the hard way that you NEVER have to erase the raw files, I lost all of my first sessions that way.