Trip to the Apple Orchard - BW

[charlie76]

A day at the apple orchard with the fam...bright sun tried to ruin all my pictures. If anyone has any good methods for PP dealing with awful bright sun like this .......??

 

[Space Face]

Good set and you really have a beautiful family there Chaz.

The only thing I can suggest and I do this when shooting wildlife in bright conditions is to under-expose, dial in that exposure compensation and shoot RAW. That way you can often pull out the best detail in PP. If you over-expose and blow the highlights, there's no recovering them.

 

[charlie76]

Good set and you really have a beautiful family there Chaz.

The only thing I can suggest and I do this when shooting wildlife in bright conditions is to under-expose, dial in that exposure compensation and shoot RAW. That way you can often pull out the best detail in PP. If you over-expose and blow the highlights, there's no recovering them.

Ok...that's a good tip. I do have all this in RAW. So basically you're saying that there is a better chance to pull out detail from an underexposed image than a blown-out overexposed image (or parts of an image,etc)? That is a good tip that I haven't thought of, but that makes sense. And that does seem right. Overexposed sections of these shots are void of info, but the underexposed areas always seem to have more detail. Good man, thanks spaceman

 

[Space Face]

Good set and you really have a beautiful family there Chaz.

The only thing I can suggest and I do this when shooting wildlife in bright conditions is to under-expose, dial in that exposure compensation and shoot RAW. That way you can often pull out the best detail in PP. If you over-expose and blow the highlights, there's no recovering them.

Ok...that's a good tip. I do have all this in RAW. So basically you're saying that there is a better chance to pull out detail from an underexposed image than a blown-out overexposed image (or parts of an image,etc)? That is a good tip that I haven't thought of, but that makes sense. And that does seem right. Overexposed sections of these shots are void of info, but the underexposed areas always seem to have more detail. Good man, thanks spaceman

Yeah, it's just that fella. Totally blown areas hold no data so unless you clone stamp or something over them you can't recover what's not there. Under exposed areas will hold data so it should be recoverable, particularly in RAW.

 

[Photo Lady]

A day at the apple orchard with the fam...bright sun tried to ruin all my pictures. If anyone has any good methods for PP dealing with awful bright sun like this .......??

adorable children and great photos of adorable children

 

[smoke665]

Looking at these on my phone but they all appear a little dark.

Personally I don't view exposure as over or under but correct for conditions. I want as much data in my file as possible for the conditions. While blowing the highlights results in a loss of detail consider that there is an equal loss of detail once you reach pure black. Given the dynamic range limitations of cameras that can create challenges. Bracketing is an easy solution but not always feasible on moving subjects. "Exposing" for the highlights and raising the shadows post is another option but also has limitations. Raising shadows is not going to bring detail back in an area thats recorded pure black, also anytime you raise the shadows post you not only amplify details you amplify/create noise.

If at all possible in daylight shots I try to limit my dynamic range either by moving the subject, using a reflector or adding flash.

 

[Rickbb]

Smoke is correct, add a fill flash. My ancient Vivitar flash has a hood to zoom or throw light further and tighter, like a spot almost. Works good in that harsh light for lighting up dark shadows on faces, foregrounds, etc.

 

[K9Kirk]

Good set and you really have a beautiful family there Chaz.

The only thing I can suggest and I do this when shooting wildlife in bright conditions is to under-expose, dial in that exposure compensation and shoot RAW. That way you can often pull out the best detail in PP. If you over-expose and blow the highlights, there's no recovering them.

Ok...that's a good tip. I do have all this in RAW. So basically you're saying that there is a better chance to pull out detail from an underexposed image than a blown-out overexposed image (or parts of an image,etc)? That is a good tip that I haven't thought of, but that makes sense. And that does seem right. Overexposed sections of these shots are void of info, but the underexposed areas always seem to have more detail. Good man, thanks spaceman

First of all, nice set.
It's (underexposing) what a lot of people do when shooting all white birds like say, a great egret. It's the only way to tone down that reflective light so that any detail in the feathers shows. Ont he other hand it underexposes other things in the pic so there's a trade off. You can always try darkening the highlights in P.P. I use that very little because I find that (with color) it darkens and muddies colors if too much is applied. Not sure how it will work with B&W. I'd give it a try and see.

 

[Grandpa Ron]

I am curious what a neutral density filter and /or a polarizer would do for the abundance of sunshine?

It is more of a question than a suggestion.

 

[CherylL]

Shoot raw and bring the highlights down. Try the White slider too or a combination. My opinion with kids' active shots I would meter for their face and let everything else fall into place even if you have blown highlights sky.

 

[charlie76]

Looking at these on my phone but they all appear a little dark.

Personally I don't view exposure as over or under but correct for conditions. I want as much data in my file as possible for the conditions. While blowing the highlights results in a loss of detail consider that there is an equal loss of detail once you reach pure black. Given the dynamic range limitations of cameras that can create challenges. Bracketing is an easy solution but not always feasible on moving subjects. "Exposing" for the highlights and raising the shadows post is another option but also has limitations. Raising shadows is not going to bring detail back in an area thats recorded pure black, also anytime you raise the shadows post you not only amplify details you amplify/create noise.

If at all possible in daylight shots I try to limit my dynamic range either by moving the subject, using a reflector or adding flash.

No you’re not wrong they are dark for sure and very contrasty. That bright sun was a killer. And following them around often doesn’t leave time to consider exposure ... they are fast movers. Sometimes I get to bracket their little goings on, but not often. I’ve been considering a flash lately, however I know nothing about them really

 

[smoke665]

@charlie76 for many years I used the rule of thumb outside to set my exposure 2 stops under on the face then power up the flash to compensate. It worked fairly well, so long as your subject wasn't moving or the light changing rapidly. Otherwise I either had to expose for the face and let the background blow, or move to better lighting conditions.

I've always been a die hard Pentaxian, but unlike the other brands Pentax doesn't play well with 3rd party flashes, forcing me to buy an expensive branded flash to support the camera communication. Other brands have it better as there are less expensive, new and used 3rd party option flashes that support TTL and HSS. Youngnu and Godox are two that come to mind.