Barbra, I think this looks really good! It corrects the two problems I had with my photo.
1. composition: I wanted the goose to swim higher in the sky reflection so I'd have more options for placing him in the shot.
2. lighting: I knew my meter was reading this scene wrong, so I was working in manual to let more light in. My histogram spread was so good that I thought the lighting would be great, but the tree reflections turned out too dark. I tried to correct this with my editing software, but I couldn't get it to brighten without losing the sun shape.
So my question is: how do you know when the histogram is going to be wrong? If this was Jim Brandenburg's one shot for the day, I know he wouldn't have made my rookie mistake!
HMMMM.... ALL good questions - EASY for me to make corrections in the software, BUT YOU were the one who had the eye and the imagination behind the camera initially, knew exactly what you wanted the image to look like and then worked with the technical limitations and squeezed the shutter to capture the amazing shot. GROWTH!
This is a tricky exposure b/c of the extremes of light contrast. Do you expose for the highlights or the shadows? Easy when the subject is not moving and you can adjust exposure compensation. Sometimes I just get it as close as I can, knowing that if the histogram has a decent spread, I have recorded enough information that I can then further develop the image using software. That is why shooting RAW is important. There is significantly more data recorded on the sensor which can be recovered and manipulated in the digital darkroom, then if the capture was made in JPG format.
As far as Brandenburg goes, I am sure he STILL makes technical, compositional and decisive moment 'mis-takes'!
Its an ongoing quest and the beauty of photography. As Imogene Cunningham stated, the next picture I take will be my best.
Barbra,
ReplyDeleteI think this looks really good! It corrects the two problems I had with my photo.
1. composition: I wanted the goose to swim higher in the sky reflection so I'd have more options for placing him in the shot.
2. lighting: I knew my meter was reading this scene wrong, so I was working in manual to let more light in. My histogram spread was so good that I thought the lighting would be great, but the tree reflections turned out too dark. I tried to correct this with my editing software, but I couldn't get it to brighten without losing the sun shape.
So my question is: how do you know when the histogram is going to be wrong? If this was Jim Brandenburg's one shot for the day, I know he wouldn't have made my rookie mistake!
HMMMM.... ALL good questions - EASY for me to make corrections in the software, BUT YOU were the one who had the eye and the imagination behind the camera initially, knew exactly what you wanted the image to look like and then worked with the technical limitations and squeezed the shutter to capture the amazing shot. GROWTH!
ReplyDeleteThis is a tricky exposure b/c of the extremes of light contrast. Do you expose for the highlights or the shadows? Easy when the subject is not moving and you can adjust exposure compensation. Sometimes I just get it as close as I can, knowing that if the histogram has a decent spread, I have recorded enough information that I can then further develop the image using software. That is why shooting RAW is important. There is significantly more data recorded on the sensor which can be recovered and manipulated in the digital darkroom, then if the capture was made in JPG format.
As far as Brandenburg goes, I am sure he STILL makes technical, compositional and decisive moment 'mis-takes'!
Its an ongoing quest and the beauty of photography. As Imogene Cunningham stated, the next picture I take will be my best.