Having not enjoyed
the previous exercise I decided to give it another go to see whether I could
get any better results - I achieved a 4 stop difference which was even worse
than my previous result! With this in mind I decided not to complete this
exercise. I did do some more reading about dynamic range however.
In his book 'Perfect Exposure', (Ilex 2009) Michael
Freeman discusses dynamic range and how this relates to exposure extensively.
He defines dynamic range as "the ratio
between the maximum and minimum luminance values in a scene or in an
image." He also concludes that "the
highest image quality in digital photography comes from using the full dynamic
range of the sensor to capture the full range of the scene." I am
unsure about this statement. "highest
image quality" seems a particularly loaded phrase and while I think
I understand what Freeman is asserting I do not think I share his valuation of
what makes an image of the highest quality. As I became more interested in
photography I become less worried about making images that comply with an
accepted notion of aesthetic beauty and more concerned about how a picture can
be more interesting because it breaks convention. For example, previously I
would always select the lowest ISO setting I could to achieve the smoothest
tonal values in my pictures (and what I thought was the highest quality.) Now,
I find myself often using high ISO settings and have come to appreciate the
immediacy noise can add to a picture.
Freeman continues to
describe (what he considers) to be the 12 types of exposure situation and how
recognising these in combination with an understanding of the cameras dynamic
range can enable the photographer to select the desired exposure settings. He
says that he arrived at this analysis through experience:
"the way we assess types of scenes
subconsciously has been built up over time and is embedded somewhere in our
brains"
Analysing a scene
relies on understanding key tones (one or more areas of a scene that have
commanding importance) and average tone (most people expect most subjects to be
average in tone.)
1st Group - The Range Fits:
- Range Fits - Average
The
dynamic range of the scene fits the range of the sensor - histogram within
5-10% of the limits.
Good
practice - take a test shot (especially for action.)
Technique
- spot maximum highlight and minimum shadow in a scene and make a decision
which to set exposure for.
- Range Fits - Bright
Examples
- snow, white walls, white clothing.
Average
meter readings would not give the right result, use centre weighted on the key
tone and positive exposure compensation.
- Range Fits - Dark
Opposite
approach to 2 to keep dark details black and not grey.
2nd Group - Low Range:
Atmospheric
conditions diffuse light and act as a filter that even out tones in a scene
e.g.. Haze, mist, fog, dust.
- Low - Average
Histogram
will be cantered with room either side, often 'bell' shaped.
Sometimes
called flat lighting
- Low - Bright
No
important shadow areas.
Will
often need positive exposure compensation to keep bright but danger of
highlight clipping.
- Low - Dark
Not
common - mainly due to taste - people prefer light rather than dark images.
Most low key images tend to have small bright tones which raise the dynamic
range e.g.. Dusk, dawn, night, deep colours e.g.. Purple.
3rd Group - High Range:
Also referred to as
over scaled or high contrast. Important to make decisions about clipping.
- High Key - Average
Extreme
mixture of tones, some clipping inevitable. Most common lighting situation when
range is high.
- High - Large Brighter
Subject
matter brighter than average and the surroundings.
Technique
- centre weighted and positive exposure compensation.
- High - Small Brighter
Difficult
to measure - spot metering best. Histogram of little use because small area of
brightness displayed as relatively few pixels. When key tone small danger of
over exposure - care needed to avoid clipping but high enough to show detail.
- High - Edge Lit
Most
specific, rarest and difficult lighting situation. Effect depends on situation
e.g.. Thin edge may blow highlights, broader expose as light, not clipped.
Bright
edge usually key tone meaning loss of shadow detail is often acceptable. (An
example of a low key image)
- High - Large Darker
Background
will suffer from over exposure unless contrast dealt with by adding light or in
software.
Very
common e.g.. Outdoor scene with a band of sky.
Choices
- expose for average tone or darker or silhouette.
- High - Small Darker
Background
always dominates here and is where exposure decisions should be taken.
Freeman brings his
analysis of exposure situations with a description of Envision - being able to imagine how a scene will look if you
give it a certain exposure:
- Learn to discount your eyes efficiency at seeing detail in deep shadows and bright highlights as your camera cannot see both.
- Be able to imagine how a scene will reproduce of given 'normal' or 'average' exposure.
- Decide how you would like it to look.
- Anticipate how it might look under different lighting conditions that are practically possible, such as change in the angle of sunlight or under controlled conditions by changing lighting.
While I find the
information here interesting, even invaluable, it remains difficult to
translate into practical application. The notes imply the ability to consider a
scene carefully and make adjustments as necessary without time pressure.
Unfortunately, in practice this is not often possible. I guess this is where
experience comes to the fore and becomes key. I imagine accomplished
photographers like Freeman are able to analyse a scene quickly and come make
exposure decisions almost intuitively. I have a tendency not to think too much
about the exposure settings I make, partly this is because experience means I
have a clear idea of the result that will be achieved but also it I because I
always shoot raw and know I have a certain latitude to be to alter exposure in
processing. I have never worried about this but increasingly I am beginning to
think this is laziness on my part - should I be striving to have a clearer
understanding of what a photograph will look like when and attempting to get my
camera settings as close as possible to this or is it okay to make these
decisions at the computer screen? I do not think there is a right or wrong
answer to this and experimentation is probably the best course of action. I
will attempt to apply the knowledge gained here to my shooting however and see
if the results are different.
No comments:
Post a Comment