Overexposure!

[Ant]

During my last picture taking session I wanted to use a slower shutter speed in order to get some motion blurring. Unfortunately, it only resulted in badly overexposed pics. I used the smallest aperture that I could which was F8 and I was on ISO 50. I couldn't think of anything else to compensate for the slow shutter speed. It was a bright sunny day. Are there any other options for exposure compensation in order to drop the shutter speed?

BTW. Using digital.

 

[Bob_McBob]

There are options like using a neutral density filter. However, it sounds like you just randomly changed settings without really understanding what you were doing. If you change the shutter speed, you have to adjust the sensitivity or aperture size correctly to compensate for the exposure change, you can't just make it as small as possible and hope it comes out okay.

 

[Ant]

There are options like using a neutral density filter. However, it sounds like you just randomly changed settings without really understanding what you were doing. If you change the shutter speed, you have to adjust the sensitivity or aperture size correctly to compensate for the exposure change, you can't just make it as small as possible and hope it comes out okay.

No I didn't just change it at random, and although I'm quite a newbie at photography I pretty much understand the basic principles, it's hardly rocket science.

What I did was this: I didn't know exactly what shutter speed to use to get the correct effect so I'd drop the speed by one stop to see how it turned out, and of course changed the aperture by one stop to compensate and keep the correct exposure. Unfortunately once I'd got to a shutter speed of 1/40 I was at F8 and so I couldn't close the aperture any further, so any drop in shutter speed from then on just caused overexposure.

I'm not familiar with filters. How does a neutral density filter work?

 

[Bob_McBob]

A neutral density filter cuts the amount of light entering the lens by a certain amount, depending on how strong it is (they come in various strengths). Here's a decent link about them (lots of results on Google): http://www.photofilter.com/neutral_density.htm

 

[Ant]

Great. Thanks for the link.

 

[BernieSC]

What camera are you using? I still use film cameras so as far as exposure and lenses compared to 35mm lenses I am not completely up on. But only stopping down to f8 sounds unusal for what sounds like a camera you can at least use manual controls on. f8 in bright sun is still opening up a lot. If I were you I would keep the ISO at 100 or higher then try shooting at 1/90-1/60 you should get motion blur even at those speeds.


I do know from playing with digitals and lighting the digital chips are very light sensitive so what would take high power lighting for film you will burn up the photo with digital if you use the same amount of lighting.

If you can use priority modes on your camera I would just bracket the photos in shutter priority.

 

[BernieSC]

Also, instead of setting the ASA at a low speed I would try setting it at a higher speed 200 or 400 if possible.

 

[Ant]

I'm only using an Olympus C750, and unfortunately F8 is the maximum

I'm afraid I don't understand your advice about upping the ISO level. Surely bumping it up from ISO 50 to ISO 100 would make it even more sensitive to light and just exacerbate the problem. In fact with my camera I know that upping the ISO would make the overexposure worse, as well as starting to add noise that I don't want.

I've only had the camera for just over a month and although I'm really happy with the performance for normal still shots I now know that I'm going to have to invest in a digital SLR to do what I really want.

 

[mrsid99]

Bernie's advice would work for a film camera but not for a digital.
ND filters are about your only option.

 

[Ant]

ND filters are about your only option.

Well, I've come up with a different option.......buy a better camera

I suppose I could buy filters, but I've decided that if I'm going to invest in extra equipment I might as well start with a DSLR.

 

[mrsid99]

I've decided that if I'm going to invest in extra equipment I might as well start with a DSLR.

Welcome to the darkside!
So wotcha you gonna get huh?

 

[Ant]

I've decided that if I'm going to invest in extra equipment I might as well start with a DSLR.

Welcome to the darkside!
So wotcha you gonna get huh?

You're not wrong about the darkside. I'm starting to get jitters about my bank account already

I'm looking to get a Nikon D70. Realistically I won't be able to afford one for another three months and by that time the airshow season will be just about over, so if I was being sensible I could wait until next spring..... But then again being sensible is no fun so I'll probably look to get one as soon as I can afford it.

 

[tr0gd0o0r]

What exactly are you photographing? Is there any reason why you couldn't take a trip to the location at a different time of day when there isn't as much light out.?

 

[Ant]

What exactly are you photographing? Is there any reason why you couldn't take a trip to the location at a different time of day when there isn't as much light out.?

I'm photographing aircraft at airshows, so I'm stuck with what I've got in regard to light unfortunately.

It's a good learning process though. I knew absolutely nothing about photography at all two months ago and now I'm frustrated because I'm trying to push my camera further than it's capabilities.

I now know why people pay more than $1000 for an SLR camera

 

[tr0gd0o0r]

are you trying to get some motion blur of airplanes as they pass you in the air?

If so, 1/40th might be fast enough, especially for jets flying overhead. If you take a photo at the longest possible focal length, with the aircraft as close to you as its gonna get, then that will also help out your cause.