A B&W shot from today

[ThoughtfulPirate]

I like this a lot, tell me what you think. I took it in black and white mode, and I think it works pretty well.

[Peter_AUS]

I like this a lot, tell me what you think. I took it in black and white mode, and I think it works pretty well.

I lightened it in PS, is this better or not.

[Spike]

I lightened it in PS, is this better or not.

In the original version, the subject is so dark, he just merges in with the background. The shot is very busy. But in your lightened version the subject stands out much much better. I think it's a big improvement. In this case, I think color could help the subject stand out from the background even more, as long as he wasn't wearing earth tones.

Good timing on this action shot - well framed.

But keep experiementing with b&w, TP.

Spike

[ThoughtfulPirate]

Yeah I dont really like to do any Photoshop. I need to get an external flash to light up the woods shots.

[racingpinarello]

Yeah I dont really like to do any Photoshop. I need to get an external flash to light up the woods shots.

I don't think that Peter did anything in photoshop that would be classified as manipulation. Scanners typically darken the image and Peter only brought backt the original detail. The shot is very good, and without Peter's "adjustment" then we wouldn't know. He probably spent less than a minute to correct the photo. Photolabs do the same thing.

You can correct this in a couple of ways, through the scanner, through photoshop, or through the camera with a flash, or proper exposure.

Loren

[Spike]

Yeah, what racingpinarello said! It's not necessary for you to use a flash on this shot, but you need to get your exposure correct. In this case, your subject (shot) is under-exposed.
Spike

You can correct this in a couple of ways, through the scanner, through photoshop, or through the camera with a flash, or proper exposure.
Loren

[Peter_AUS]

Loren was right too exactly 1 sec to improve that shot using the shadows/highlighting adjustment in PS CS. I tried to get it up yesterday before you went off line but just missed you.

Spike has said it. Exposure is the key to your shots, just about all of them have had this darkness to them. What settings are you using when you take the shot, post them and maybe suggestions from the gurus that take these types of shots all the time can stear you the right direction and you can get your shots straight out of camera.

[ThoughtfulPirate]

I dont really remember what settings I was shooting on. I know I can correct it with my exposure, but this shot looked a lot lighter on my lcd screen after I took it, so I saw no need to adjust it. The reason I said I want a bigger flash is I feel like when shooting in the woods I lose a lot in the shadows. I would like to be able to brighten those areas up. I think I was shooting with my aperture all the way open, 1/320-1/500 shutter speed. Maybe I should have bumped up the sensitivity, I think I had it set on 100 or 200. Thanks for the help. I think I am used to relying a lot more on flash (my other camera had a bit more powerful one.) This is my second month shooting a manual camera.

[Peter_AUS]

Then you need to start writing down what your settings are for each of the frames you take, lighting conditions, f-stop used, aperture, ISO etc, with that information you can review each photo and decide how you could improve the shot.

[Charles Hess]

because if you plan on selling/showing images like this, your exposures have to be right on the money. Photoshop is no different than if you were dodging and burning in the darkroom. Most pros probably don't like to spend time with photoshop, as you state about your dislike, but I'm sure most pros are thankful that photoshop exists for tweaking and touching up. Good shot, made better by Loren's tweak.

Then you need to start writing down what your settings are for each of the frames you take, lighting conditions, f-stop used, aperture, ISO etc, with that information you can review each photo and decide how you could improve the shot.

[ThoughtfulPirate]

I certainly agree that his tweaking made it better, I just dont like editing images. I feel like its almost cheating, because I can take a super dark picture (much darker than this) and then fix it and make it a good picture. I would rather have you guys tell me that its dark then edit and have everyone tell me its perfect, when really, brightness-wise, all thats perfect is my photoshopping skills. Im not selling the pictures or even printing most of them, I just take them for fun.

Thanks for your input.

EDIT: Messing with my camera, I just found out how to review my settings for each shot. The reason it is so dark (I think) is that I forgot to change my ISO from 50, which I had been shooting on earlier.

[Spike]

Hi, TP. I don't mean to pound on you, but are you shooting digital? If so, then you know each shot has the camera settings automatically saved too. I think it's called the exif info..? If you're shooting film, nevermind me.

Also, you might want to consider recalibrating your lcd monitor (computer monitor, not camera monitor I'm assuming you meant). Actually, I have no idea if lcds are calibrated the same way as regular monitors... there must be an equivalent utility..?

Cheers,

Spike

[another view]

One thought about using fill flash - it's a good idea but at 1/320 to 1/500 shutter speed you're gonna need a pro-level DSLR (or film SLR) to be able to do it. And it will take a pretty powerful flash unit, too.

I agree with what others have said here regarding what does and does not constitute manipulation. These guidelines are pretty standard in the world of photography. Realize that whenever you shoot negative film, the prints that you get back will have the same basic adjustments made to them. This can include lightening, darkening and changes to color balance. My theory is to get it as close to perfect as you can in-camera, but the basic operations talked about here can make a big difference in the final product.

It's good to look at the image right in the camera and learn from it - try to figure out why it's too dark, for example. Next time you're in a similar situation you might nail the exposure.

[ThoughtfulPirate]

Yeah, I guess I may have come off offended in earlier reply, Im not, I guess I am just disappointed that I really liked this picture and I dont know if I like it as much now. I set my lcd a bit darker on my camera so it will be closer to what it looks like on screen. The picture on the LCD looked like the corrected one on here.

[another view]

One nice thing about digital capture is that you can pull so much information out of the shadows. I don't think it's wrong to try to do it, the choice may be to do it or not have a shot. Besides, other than the histogram, I've never really felt comfortable judging exposure from the on-camera LCD. If you're in a dimly lit building you should be OK, but outside it's hard to tell - for me anyway.

[ThoughtfulPirate]

Yeah I was referring to after I shot it, it looked perfect, but then it looked darker on my monitor at home.