help with shade/sun pics

[dahamsta7]

So I've been in a few situations where I'm in shade, trying to take a picture of something in the shade as well as something that is in the sun. The part in the sun comes out over exposed. Tips on how to fix this?

Here's an example of a pic i took from the weekend:

 

[Emilymarie]

Expose for the sun or the brightest part of the subject.

 

[KmH]

The dynamic range a scene like that has, far exceeds the dynamic range the image sensor in your camera can capture with a single exposure.

You can make 2 exposures and blend them: 1 exposure for the sunlit portion of the scene, the second for the shaded portion of the scene.

Another option is to make enough exposures to make a HDR. A scene like the one you posted may require 6 or more exposures to make a good HDR. How many would be needed would depend on the total dynamic range in the scene.

If you have more of a straight horizontal line between the bright and the shade you can put a neutral density filter on the lens, or in a filter holder, to make the bright part darker.

 

[ballr4lyf]

Expose for the sun or the brightest part of the subject.

The dynamic range a scene like that has, far exceeds the dynamic range the image sensor in your camera can capture with a single exposure.

You can make 2 exposures and blend them: 1 exposure for the sunlit portion of the scene, the second for the shaded portion of the scene.

Another option is to make enough exposures to make a HDR. A scene like the one you posted may require 6 or more exposures to make a good HDR. How many would be needed would depend on the total dynamic range in the scene.

If you have more of a straight horizontal line between the bright and the shade you can put a neutral density filter on the lens, or in a filter holder, to make the bright part darker.

What they said. :thumbup:

 

[Photogger]

What Keith said....he da man!

 

[OBRichard]

Wikepedia has a good explanation of the HDR photo and the range of "stops" that various devices can handle. Search for High_dynamic_range_imaging

 

[doziergraphic]

you can also use a graduated density filter - googled and first article that looked decent:

How To Use Graduated Filters

 

[dahamsta7]

thanks for the help everyone. hdr seems a bit advanced but ill read up on it. =)

does the bottom look properly exposed?

 

[Boomn4x4]

does the bottom look properly exposed?

No, its under exposed.

 

[Tight Knot]

This is a basic HDR using just your 1 image. 3 photos bracketed together at +- 2 stops apart could have made this a wonderful picture, nice blue skies, good waterfall, and great shadows.
It's almost impossible (without a LOT of pp) to regain the blown skies and parts that are over exposed.

 

[Fujito]

I would just shoot that scene at a different time of day. It's a lot less hastle than HDR or blending two exposures in PS. Ansel Adams waited for the perfect time to take the picture. Observe the location then choose when to take the shot.

 

[KmH]

This is a basic HDR using just your 1 image. 3 photos bracketed together at +- 2 stops apart could have made this a wonderful picture, nice blue skies, good waterfall, and great shadows.
It's almost impossible (without a LOT of pp) to regain the blown skies and parts that are over exposed.

Only a psuedo-HDR can be made from a single photo.
You can't make an HDR by pushing and pulling an online JPEG. A JPEG doesn't have 2 EV of latitude.

It takes a minimum of 3 exposures to make an HDR, and most 3 exposure HDR's don't turn out all that good.
Most often more exposures are needed, and the exposure steps needed will vary from 1/2 EV to 3 EV, depending on the scene.
The EV steps also may not be centered on 0 EV, but may need to be biased to the + or - side of the light meter.

 

[Tight Knot]

This is a basic HDR using just your 1 image. 3 photos bracketed together at +- 2 stops apart could have made this a wonderful picture, nice blue skies, good waterfall, and great shadows.
It's almost impossible (without a LOT of pp) to regain the blown skies and parts that are over exposed.

Only a psuedo-HDR can be made from a single photo.
You can't make an HDR by pushing and pulling an online JPEG. A JPEG doesn't have 2 EV of latitude.

It takes a minimum of 3 exposures to make an HDR, and most 3 exposure HDR's don't turn out all that good.
Most often more exposures are needed, and the exposure steps needed will vary from 1/2 EV to 3 EV, depending on the scene.
The EV steps also may not be centered on 0 EV, but may need to be biased to the + or - side of the light meter.

Absolutely true, that's why my HDR of this really didn't come out well.

 

[sobolik]

The dynamic range a scene like that has, far exceeds the dynamic range the image sensor in your camera can capture with a single exposure.

You can make 2 exposures and blend them: 1 exposure for the sunlit portion of the scene, the second for the shaded portion of the scene.

Another option is to make enough exposures to make a HDR. A scene like the one you posted may require 6 or more exposures to make a good HDR. How many would be needed would depend on the total dynamic range in the scene.

If you have more of a straight horizontal line between the bright and the shade you can put a neutral density filter on the lens, or in a filter holder, to make the bright part darker.

"The dynamic range a scene like that has, far exceeds the dynamic range the image sensor in your camera can capture with a single exposure. You can..."

I would have hand held a **solid ND filter (or a stack) so that the corner(s) stuck down from the top to tone down the bright top center U shaped section and bring the intensity of the bright closer to the dark. (**the lens can't focus on the filter edges)