|
|
ahmad alayoub
{K:-218} 10/27/2005
|
i like the contrasty photos
about the question:
in every lighting condition, simply take the exposure metering from the part of the picture that you want it to be middle grey then recompose and shot.
in thes case it is the ceiling.
i recommend reading "simplified zone system" book at amazon.
|
|
|
|
Martin .
{K:24957} 10/2/2005
|
Sally,
I do like the paint brushes drying, while the ceiling needs painting. I think that the fumes from the cleaning solvent coming off the brushes have caused this over time...
You might try setting your exposure meter on your camera at +1, or +2 stops. Maybe get yourself a hand held meter for these kind of situations. A hand held meter will not be fooled by the window lighting like an on board camera meter, because it will only meter the light falling on the brushes when used correctly. Of course you will blow out the window lighting pretty heavy when doing this...
I own a Sekonic L-358, which are a bit pricy at around $250.00. You can get many others for less, but I would suggest going with the digital ones. I also have an old Sekonic anlalog, but they can be a bit tricky when converting the data. Analogs also don't work with flash either... Not that I do flash a whole lot anyway, but the L-358 will average both ambiant and flash lighting at the same time. That comes in handy at times. Or at least it might if I ever needed that option... lol
Martin
|
|
|
|
Sally Morgan
{K:9219} 8/23/2005
|
I don't think it's so much the tripod as the quick release plate, and the ball head!
|
|
|
|
Helen Bach
{K:2331} 8/23/2005
|
Sally,
Just in case you don't know this: if you are concerned about tripod stability you could try hanging something heavy from the head, and if the legs then slip outwards a bit (eg on a tile floor), tie some string round them. The alternative to a weight is a bungee cord that you hang down from the head then step on.
Best,
Helen
|
|
|
|
|
Helen Bach
{K:2331} 8/22/2005
|
Hi Sally,
I'm only three months behind everyone else, but I thought that I might comment anyway.
I think that you have done a great job here, but if you do want more texture in the brushes, and detail outside then I'd suggest taking two different exposures and combining them in Photoshop.
I'll go through it step-by-step, though I suspect that you will know how to do it already and a lot of what I write will be redundant.
Take an exposure reading from the window - just point the camera at the bright part of the window and find the shutter speed to correspond with say f/16 - I guess that you want as much depth of field as possible. Use f/22 if the lens goes that far. Now, keeping that aperture, take a reading from the wall just beside the window - don't have any part of the window in the viewfinder. Make a note of the shutter speed. It is likely to be very long.
Put the camera on a tripod and take two pictures at the two exposure settings. The important things are that the focus should not change at all (altering focus alters the image size) and the aperture should not change either. Only the shutter speed should change. You could change the 'ISO' rating, but I'd keep it at 200 for both pictures.
Then load them into PS and you are away.
An alternative is as already suggested: put an ND gel on the window. That's what we do in the movies, but you needn't do it for a still life.
Best wishes,
Helen
|
|
|
|
|
Keith Ruddell
{K:3570} 5/31/2005
|
beautiful shot.. I'd suggest bracketing too but I think you did a great job anyway
|
|
|
|
|
David Morris
{K:1404} 5/2/2005
|
Let me know if you do, I will be interested in seeing it. David
|
|
|
|
|
Sally Morgan
{K:9219} 5/2/2005
|
Thank you for the further explanation! I've got half a day off tomorrow - so I could try the shot again.
Again, thank you!
|
|
|
|
|
David Morris
{K:1404} 5/2/2005
|
Sally,
The ISO setting is really the easiest part of all of this. It is simply the exposure time of the camera that is closest to the film ISO speed of your film. For example, if you are shooting with a 400 speed film your exposure time would be 1/400th of a second (most likely your cameras setting would have a 1/500th of a second). If you are using a 100 speed film, you would shoot at 1/100th of a second (again, most likely 1/125th of a second).
These are just approximates for shooting, in time you will learn that you will need to increase something depending on the light and Depth of Field that you want. You could use f/16 at 1/500 or f/11 at 1/1000 or f/22 at 1/250. Remember, though that if you change one, you will have to change the other. A larger f number (less light) will require a slower exposure and they work in tandem. Going from f/11 to f/16 is the same as going from 1/500 to 1/250 (not exactly the same, but very, very close).
I can see where my original comment could be a little confusing, I appologise for that.
If you still have questions, please feel free to let me know.
Still, a very nice shot.
David
|
|
|
|
|
Sally Morgan
{K:9219} 5/2/2005
|
Hi David - thanks for taking the time to comment - I don't understand the ISO bit of the sunny 16 rule - can you explain it in laymans terms - so I can go and try it out!
Thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
David Morris
{K:1404} 4/28/2005
|
Very nice shot and you did pretty well with the exposure. I think to get this "right" you would expose for the medium and then work it in the darkroom (oh, how old am I) or the computer. When faced with this situation, I shoot using the "sunny 16" rule (f/16 and 1/[film ISO] as a starting guide then change the number accordingly f/8 at 1/[ISO*2]). It works for me.
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Lily
{K:10966} 4/16/2005
|
Excellent composition. Sally, I'm no expert either but if you try the bracketing suggestion, you can later bring all the different exposures into Photoshop and combine them together for the best overall exposure (by masking parts you don't want).
|
|
|
|
|
Sally Morgan
{K:9219} 4/15/2005
|
Thanks for the suggestions - I haven't tried either bracketing exposures or using my flash yet - I need to read up on the technique, and overcome my fear of flashes(!)
|
|
|
|
|
Luke Luther
{K:14693} 4/15/2005
|
I agree with Jimmy Payne. You did well. Maybe bracket around the exposure and use fill flash.
|
|
|
|
|
Jimmy Payne
{K:21163} 3/25/2005
|
You did very well with this exposure. I would have used my camera's fill flash.
Tnanks for your comment on my squirrel post.
Jimmy
|
|
|
|
AJ Miller
{K:49168} 3/21/2005
|
I also think you've done a pretty good job here. You could always cover the window up from outside...
AJ
|
|
|
|
|
Gary Prebble
{K:1168} 3/21/2005
|
Appealling shot,it looks like a true home handyman's workshed ; I can relate to that. It's difficult to get good exposure control in those circumstance. To me , i would say you have done well; but I am very much an amatuer, and also would be interested in what others have to say on that subject.
|
|
0 
