shadow or light?

[ArtphotoasiA]

Hi guys....

I actually have a doubt quite important... and I got different answers.

As you all have more experience with digital photography than I do, I wonder which is better between 2 ways in case of a difficult light in photography.

1) Try to underexpose a little the photo so that all the highlights in the picture are safe and not burned.... but the shadows will be too black.

2) Try to overexpose a little so that the shadows will be transparent but the highlights will be white.

I read someone saying that case 2 is a better way to reduce the noise particularly in the shadows... so must pursuit....

I read someone saying that case 1 is better because the highlight once is gone are gone and can not recover the details inside...



What you think?

[nirofo]

Originally Posted by ArtphotoasiA

Hi guys....

I actually have a doubt quite important... and I got different answers.

As you all have more experience with digital photography than I do, I wonder which is better between 2 ways in case of a difficult light in photography.

1) Try to underexpose a little the photo so that all the highlights in the picture are safe and not burned.... but the shadows will be too black.

2) Try to overexpose a little so that the shadows will be transparent but the highlights will be white.

I read someone saying that case 2 is a better way to reduce the noise particularly in the shadows... so must pursuit....

I read someone saying that case 1 is better because the highlight once is gone are gone and can not recover the details inside...



What you think?

Expose for the highlights, I always underexpose by 1/3 to1/2 stop then adjust my RAW file accordingly.

nirofo.

[ArtphotoasiA]

Thank you guys actually is the first time that I find out a book that stated to overexpose a pictures in order to have less noise in the shadow... sound strange and far a minor problem that a burned shy.

[snappychappy]

Both ways are correct, depends what you want to show in your image, of course you could process as an HDR image and have both.

[ArtphotoasiA]

Originally Posted by snappychappy

Both ways are correct, depends what you want to show in your image, of course you could process as an HDR image and have both.

Sure but I'm not a fan of HDR or PP I prefer make a good shot since the beginning.

[gordon g]

Originally Posted by ArtphotoasiA

Sure but I'm not a fan of HDR or PP I prefer make a good shot since the beginning.

Then all you can do is compromise and decide which bit is more important to have right in that particular image - there isnt a hard and fast rule. It's whichever works for the subject in front of your lens at the time.

[ArtphotoasiA]

I started now to check all my digital files... I have more then 1300 shot from my Canon450 to be checked and developed... at the end probaly I will select 500 shots.

Lately I was busy rewriting code of my website... so I continued to shoot around but raw file still there on my HD.

I noted that if I bracket on the field.... later at home will be quite good sit down at PC and look different expositions of the same shot to find the best one. Old school? why not.

[ArtphotoasiA]

Hi guys!!

I started today my big 'lightroom' job of about 2000 pic 200 will survive I guess. Will see.
I know I'm newby but I was litterly AMAZED and loved the software the raw flessibility.... what is possible to do with raw files of my canon 450 can not immagine before....
You can get so perfect images and recover a lot, really a lot... also severely overexposed shot... unless are really really burned out!!

Can not even compare with photoshop and jpg elaboration I was used before working on films and scanning.

Quality of 12mpx shot
Quality and flessibility of raw files
Quality and controll of the elaboration in Lightroom

Can not ask more really.... when I will finish to set my new workflow I will go on like a mad!

[Alex1994]

I always found that film handles lighting extremes better than CCDs/CMOSs, giving you a more graduated difference between lighting extremes. I'm sure many will disagree, with digital sensors improving at the rate they are.

[ArtphotoasiA]

Originally Posted by Alex1994

I always found that film handles lighting extremes better than CCDs/CMOSs, giving you a more graduated difference between lighting extremes. I'm sure many will disagree, with digital sensors improving at the rate they are.

no no I will not desagree... is true... only the last CMOSs can give a good lighting... beside the issue is complicated because in one case is a proprierty of the film.... and it show nicely and smooth ......... in the other case CMOSs sensor respond to a precise ammount of light and sometimes can be rought.