"Expose for the sky / Expose for the subject"

R

rabaroo

Messages
324
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi

when taking pictures in the past I've suffered with blown out highlights from exposing on the subject (a building) and neglecting the sky....

the advice i was given that you'd need to expose for the sky, then do a second shot and expose for the subject, and blend the two together for optimal results?


question therefore - how can you do that and guarantee to have the same composition to overlay one on top of the other?!- even with a tripod I dont see how you can expose for both in two shots and guarantee for them to be in line?

does that make sense?
 
If you've got a good solid tripod it shouldn't be a problem. If you're less confident about the tripod then work out the exposures before hand and shoot with an AEB setting that covers both and use a remote release to reduce the time between shots and any movement.
 
I agree, bracket say 3 or 5 shots on slow continuous shooting mode on a tripod. In that way only around two/three seconds will cover the selected range.
 
It does make sense mate,
Blending multiple exposures is made easier witht the use of a tripod although it is quite possible without.

Maybe a good way of getting yourself familar is using the bracketing facility on your camera if it has one.
With bracketing, a predetermined number of images will be taken at different levels of exposure, then you can either pick which exposure is more accurate or have a go at blending a couple together in post.

I find that a steady hand plus switching the drive mode to high speed continous and then holding the shutter button down until all exposures have been taken will get good results.
Especially if there is good enough light to get decent shutter speeds, then there won't be too much movement between frames.

It takes practise but works very well for me.

T.
 
Or, if you have Photoshop CS3 (or CS4) use auto-align layers, having placed one of the two images into the other as a layer.

This will sort out the alignment issue. You will then need to handle masking or erasing the appropriate part of the top layer.

Anthony.
 
Rabaroo,

The easiest way to do this is to shoot in RAW so you retain all the info in the shot, even though you're effecively metering (esxposing) for the highlight.You can do it with JPEGs but the amount of adjustment won't be well-received by a JPEG.

Process the RAW file so you capture all the highlight detail and then open it up in Photoshop. The shadows will be dark and horrid but don't worry.

Then re-open the RAW file, changing the exposure options so you bring the deep mid-tones and the shadows out. Okay it so it opens up in PS - you will now have two windows open with the same shot but one will show the highlights (but with heavy shadows etc); the other will have a blown-out sky but loads of shadow detail.

Then 'grab' the shot with the shadow detail revealed - just click and hold with the cursor, making sure you're holding down SHIFT. Drag it onto the other window (the one with perfect highlights) and release - this will align each shot instantly and perfectly. You now have two layers.

Then you can either use the eraser on the top layer (the one showing shadow detail but burnt-out highlights) to erase the burn-out, which reveals the perfect highlights below, or you can use layer masks to do the same thing.

Doing it this way means you can post-process single shots that may have been one-offs. I do it with most of my shots - I'd rather use this technique than go through the HDR route too.

This is one I did from one single RAW file. The skyscrapers one is another - the sky on the 'original' exposure was washed-out but RAW allowed me to bring it back to something with some depth and density.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top