Over Exposure When, Why and How
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 17 май 2024
- In this video I look at when to over exposure, why and what the final images look like.
Website: www.martincastein.com/
Your support makes a big difference to me, consider buying me a coffee here:
ko-fi.com/martincastein
Newsletter:
www.martincastein.com/newsletter
Follow me on instagram: / martincastein
If you only watch ONE MORE video of mine, make it this one:
• ISO and Sharpness are ...
=========================
![Rob49 - On Dat Money (with Cardi B) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/fTFS58mHJh8/mqdefault.jpg)
I do this a lot. As Martin says, it massively helps limit the colour palette to something pleasing. Most of the time I can't stand bright green foliage and a deep blue sky with whatever colour - and pattern... - clothes the subject is wearing. Thats's usually a recipe for underwhelming images. When shooting colour you ALWAYS need to consider the colour palette and harmony.
exactly this
Technically correct vs aesthetically pleasing - the penny drops. I like your explanation of over/under exposure from the perspective of a pleasing picture.
I shoot film, and one of the practices I’ve carried over from that into digital is I always shoot for the shadows. Just a habit I do without thinking about it. This can be a good or a bad thing. It does me well as a gig photographer in most instances. I suppose it also boils down to knowing how well you know your RAW files…. Are they robust enough to push and pull back as needed.
Thank you Martin, very helpful video. I have noticed that when family and friends look at my images, they don't say, "Oh, the catch light in that background mirror is blown out!". They look at these asthetics and emotions of the image. So, yes, your explanation of this topic does resonate with me. It was also a really interesting idea of when to use manual and aperture priority modes. Finally, this video really fits in well with your recent video on metering modes. Thank you 🎉🎉🎉
Martin; you're without a doubt one of my most favourite you-tubers. You're actually a photographer that isn't focused on gimmicks. It's so sad that videos like this don't get the views that the new Sigma 24-70 mk ii videos got.
Dynamic Range and lens sharpness is just complete faff that have absolutely zero bearing on the beautiful images you can create.
thank you so much, thats great to read.
This is a wonderful video. It gives context to over and under exposing images to get the image you are after. Thanks again Martin. You are the BEST!
Glad it was helpful!
You’re absolutely right. I’m trying to be too “technically” accurate rather than considering whether or not the subject is correctly exposed. Thanks!
This makes perfect sense to me. Your advice to shoot manual in these instances are great ! I’ve been doing it in aperture priority and often the camera goes haywire and I need to keep adjusting my exposure compensation whereas moving to manual at a certain exposure setting would probably work best indeed. I’m gonna give it a try !
I hadn’t thought about it from the pleasing perspective, I often am tempted to preserve the sky and that’s an excellent question : what for ?
What’s the sky gonna bring to this picture ?
Definitely makes more sense to me optimise for preserving the skin tones rather than the sky. The “blue is distracting” was such a nugget of wisdom for me !
Thanks love your work Martin ! ❤
Thank you!
Thats correct on underexposer. On flowers. I like to under expose minus 1 stop to give it a sort of vintagey sad emotion look in camera.
Thanks for these excellent tips Martin, love your no nonsense approach to photography, its true, every day is a school day :-)
thank you!
Really helpful, thanks
Thank you. Just went through this yesterday. Long hike in the mountains with over cast and sudden sun. Spent a good long time taking pics and adjusting, thinking this very thing. Should have watched this one when it was released. Cheers Martin! great info!
welcome! glad it was useful still!
This is the clearest lesson I have heard. Thanks...
Thank you Kerry, great to hear that!
Thanks Martin!
Thanks Martin. I’m not a professional (or want to be) in any way but I learn so much from your videos.
That got me thinking. It sounds in theory like turning the heat of the shower higher because it's already scalding you. But, when you explained why, then it makes sense. Always pays to know a pro. Nice tips mate, thank you.
Great talk, it would have been good to see you explain it on cam.
Noted!
Thank you Martin great tip. love the photos you shot. looks awesome.
Another great video Martin. Your explanations make sense and this subject becomes clearer.
I'm a woodland/nature photographer (enthusiast only) and I usually try to avoid the sky in my images, however if the composition is worth it and the sky is visible I've embraced slightly overexposing, with decent results.
its art, its right if it looks good to you. Great insight and explanation, thanks for sharing
thank you!
Cracking video.
Nice to see you back Martin, I completely agree, wherever possible I prefer to use natural light. And the results speak for themselves, on some occasions technically correct isn't the correct option.
Very informative, Martin! Really like how you put this together. Great insights 🙌
Glad you enjoyed it!
Exposure is quite simple, if you know what it means. Exposure is the amount of light (strictly its density) at the sensor. People often confuse it with how dark or light the picture looks, but that's a different thing - technically called either 'value' or 'lightness'. The thing that relates the lightness you'll get fo a given exposure is ISO, which is defined by the exposure needed to produce a lightness of 18%. So if you set the exposure by metering an 18% grey object your exposure will be 'correct'. The problem is that mostly people don't carry an 18% grey card. Your camera's metering has no idea what in the scene is an 18% grey. Simple metering works on the idea that the whole scene averages out to 18%. Evaluative metering tries to recognise the type of scene and make a guess at what would be the average would be for that type of scene. So, if you're trying to do better, what you're trying work out is how does the average of your particular scene relate to 18% grey. If you think it's a lot brighter you use less exposure (- on the meter), if it's darker you use more (+ on the meter). Histograms are of no help finding out where 18% is in your scene. They are good for a raw workflow, where what you're trying to do is expose to capture as much information as you can, then set the lightness as you want when you process the image.
Just watched this and your last video from a month ago on this subject and I'm now keen to put this into practice. Great explanation.
I'll never be a pro photographer now, but love to hear explanations like this.
BTW. On the first video of yours that I watched, you said that no one takes photographs any more.
At the time I thought that couldn't be true, but you're absolutely right!
Started looking around and plenty use their phone but I rarely spotted a camera. Phones are good at snaps but holding a camera makes you think about what you're doing. Excellent channel.
thanks!
That picture of Lisa with the overexposed background is beautiful!
Thanks!
hope you are getting on with your 5dii still
@@MartinCastein Yes! It is a great camera, that has taken some of my best pictures. Discovered it because of your channel!
Firstly: thanks for the video, much appreciated as always. Secondly: I don't know whether it's due to RUclips compression, a change in your mic setup or your recording settings, but your audio suffers from aliasing. Previous videos didn't have this problem, so something has changed.
Thanks I noticed too after I will try to work out what is causing it
Lovely input, please check you microfon Martin
i know i know, i heard it after, my mistake with the audio.
Martin I just nod my head in agreement now in response to what you’re saying. It’s like a Pavlov’s dog reaction (only I’m nodding not salivating, that would be weird…mind you 🤔).
hahahah thank you!
I think the approach to take depends a bit on the contrast range of the target media. If the pictures are to be delivered printed in an album, i.e. a displayal with a very limited contrast rage, you might really be actually better off with more hi-key pastel type shots than trying to accommodate the full possible contrast range of the sensor with the skin tone more or less uncontrolled somewhere in between.
On the other hand, skies blown out to maximum white do not look good printed on white paper. Unless, of course, you print a color background to surround the pictures.
Paper is not the same as a computer display. This has to be taken into account - at least to a certain extent - on site taking the shots.
When I do landscapes with a wide angle lens and there are great differences in contrast I need to compensate indeed. Or do a HDR.
yes often HDR for those situations.
If your blinkers are very slight and you're shooting in RAW remember that the picture on the camera screen is a JPEG, so you'll have a bit more wriggle room vs the histogram.
yeah thats spot on really, if its just about blinking on the screen the RAW will be fine.
I have been shooting in a lot of different scenes and editing thousands of images. I have noticed just before watching this video there is a difference in working in post with underexposed v overexposed images. I find myself wishing I had overexposed some images vs trying to retain and protect all of the information by underexposing, which can sometimes cause problems in shadows, esp with Canon cameras. I guess I have been approaching photography very mechanically, where I may take your advice or someone else's advice and apply them as universal formulas. With more experience shooting, I have come to understand there are many contradictions to consider in photography, and the way you explain things help to make sense out of them. As amateurs, we can easily forget why there are "rules" to photography. Adherence to those "rules" don't make you better but understanding why can make you advance quickly.
this is all part of the learning experience really, once you have those "i wish i had done this instead" moments you grow.
I wonder: (why) are you against using flash for outdoor portraits?
Well in not against in principle but its often not practical, you end up locked in one place too much and it disrupts the flow of the shoot a lot. The other thing is that it takes time to get the lighting right, I feel natural light often looks better. Most of what I see as flash lit outdoors is very amatuerish just blasting flash at 45 degrees. Setting up flash outside well takes time and can be worth doing but its also a different look. I will probably do some on here at some point though.
@@MartinCastein Thanks, that would be great :) Currently I am thinking on whether to get a flash and learn to use it off camera with a softbox outdoors since too often i find the eyes in my portraits outdoors to "dead"/dark.
you dont need a flash for that you need to make sure there is light hitting your subjects eyes from either sky or something reflecting, you CAN use flash, but dont need to.
Or shoot aperture priority, but use AE lock hold
yes another option, i could never get on with it though, dont know why, id switch to manual personally but if it works for you then great.
Recently I was critized because I posted a photo where the sky was overblown. But I overexposed it on purpose, this person did not understand, that the blown out sky was necessary, just like in your examples. To make an HDR out of those scenes would be laughable.
Yeah I don’t know why people don’t get that, look at what looks best not trying to tick of things in a list because it’s technically possible
When you shoot film.
indeed