Proper Exposure

I shoot mountain bikes, 5k runs, outdoor type events. I seem to have problems really nailing the exposure consistently, especially when shooting up at a rider with a day sky in the background. I seem to either get proper exposure on the rider and blown out sky highlights or I get a proper sky exposure and a dark rider. Is the only option to expose for the sky and then use a flash? I'd love to hear your opinion on what I could be doing better to hit the exposure.

What can I do to learn how to expose my pictures correctly more consistently?

Here are two examples (sorry these aren't great examples, but the first two I came across)...

Well that is a tough one. Especially in the first shot. When the sun is behind the rider and above them, then you are going to have to make some sacrifices. I meter for the person if they are the most important element. Then look for some background to put behind them so they don't just sit in the white sky. Sorta like this. (ignore the soft focus on this one it is the only example that I had scanned)
http://www.cameracourage.com/Images/...m_roadrace.jpg

Of course you can always hit them with a fill flash...that will give you control to do anything!
http://www.cameracourage.com/Images/DexterTrinidad.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MotionBoy

Well that is a tough one. Especially in the first shot. When the sun is behind the rider and above them, then you are going to have to make some sacrifices. I meter for the person if they are the most important element.

---

That's what I've been trying to do as well, meter the racer and give up some of the sky highlights. Maybe I need to be ensuring that I'm shooting with the sun behind me more often, although that is tough when changing locations often and on tight XC courses.

I think maybe I should think about flashing the subjects and underexposing a 1/2 stop or so. Thanks for the comments.

I think you may just be in need of some pocket wizards... They will change your life! :)

Both of your pictures are backlit. Harder to expose for a subject when they are backlit and what your taking pictures of is totally shadowed and the rest of the shot is in bright sunlight.

Take picture when they are riding the other direction =D

Good old fashioned fill flash will do the job, you need no pocket wizards. I'm not saying they're not good or anything, I'm just saying they're damn expensive and there's always the job of setting them up and if you're shooting races, that may sometimes be tricky and time consuming...

If flash is not an option - and it often isn't with sporting action, I shoot a lot of soccer and flash is always out of the question - then maybe consider the metering method you are using. Are you metering manually? That will give a more consistent result in conditions where the light is not changing rapidly. Also, try and get hold of a light meter (assuming you're not already using one) - that will help get around some of the incident/ambient/backlighting issues.

And then there's those histograms. Reading the image histogram can be a fine art... but there's plenty of info on it around the net and, once you've cracked it, a few test shots prior to your main shoot will help you do the biz. Depending on what camera you are using, the 'grams can even be broken down into RGB elements which gleans even more info (by all accounts).

Well, that's my two pennies worth. Hope it's some help.

JDub-
There's a lot of good advice in this thread. And your question is a good one. The basic problem is that, when it comes to exposure, you can't have it all. Our eyes and brains allow us to "see" things that no camera can actually capture. Your brain balances out highlights and shadows, but a camera can't do that. There are a bunch of ways to deal with this problem. Each technique has a different effect and you need to balance those effects against your need to get a particular image. Here's a list of methods for getting better exposure:

1) Shoot at another time of day
2) Shoot from a different direction
3) Use a flash
4) Fix it in Photoshop

As I said, each one of those techniques will have a different effect or look. Flash is a solution but it drastically changes the look of a photo. Sometimes that's not the best solution. Lately, I've been thiking more about the look I want and less about quick fixes. That being the case, when light is tough, I first think about whether I can correct it in Photoshop. Then I start looking for an angle where the light is better. And ultimately, I think about the best time of day, and even the best time of year, for getting the photo I want. Weather is an issue, too. Often, the best conditions are when there are some thin, high clouds, to diffuse the sun. I've been able to get photos on days with light clouds that were absolutely impossible on a bright, sunny day.

I hope that helps. Looking at your photos, I think the first two things you can work on are angle and exposure. A better angle gets you better light. And a a better exposure, with good highlight and shadow detail, gives you room to craft your image later, in Photoshop.

Thanks to all who have commented, like PJ said there seems to be lots of good advice here. I think I'll try the fill flash and expose for the sky first.

I am currently just letting the camera (Canon Digital Rebel) do the metering with a center point focus (I believe that weights the exposure to the center).

The time of day and direction of sunlight are two things that I can typically not control. I shoot mainly XC races, so the time is set by the promoter. The direction I shoot is selectable by me, but I often try to find some more exciting aspect of the course to shoot. The two shots I showed are just quick snaps that I took at a recent race.

About the angles though...
What angle would some of you MTB shooters suggest. I tend to try and kneel down and shoot upwards so I can capture the expression on the face, but maybe I should use a longer focal length lens and shoot straight on. I'd like to hear your thoughts on that.

Anyway thanks again to all, it certainly has helped me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JDub

The time of day and direction of sunlight are two things that I can typically not control. I shoot mainly XC races, so the time is set by the promoter. The direction I shoot is selectable by me, but I often try to find some more exciting aspect of the course to shoot.

---

Yeah. The timing of most races does suck for lighting. But you can still take a look at the sun and move around to try to get the best light. Sometimes it's better, even necessary, to sacrifice drama for a better exposure. If you want something really dramatic, bring a rider back after the race and set it up in the best light possible.

One trick I use is to hold up my hand and see how the shadows look on my fingers. Try changing your angle to get more light and less shadow on your hand. Sometimes changing your angle a few degrees can make a big difference. As is often the case, make sure you're really seeing what's in front of you. Look hard and make conscious decisions.

Maybe it's time to start using those manual exposure modes, too. I never use auto. I'd rather make my own mistakes. You're shooting digital, right? If you are, there's no excuse. You can shoot a test and correct before you ever shoot a rider.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Photo-John

Maybe it's time to start using those manual exposure modes, too. I never use auto. I'd rather make my own mistakes. You're shooting digital, right? If you are, there's no excuse. You can shoot a test and correct before you ever shoot a rider.

---

You are probably right on the manual mode..I shoot mostly in AV mode now to select my aperature, and then let the camera meter and set the shutter speed. I shoot with a Canon 300D, so sometimes I use the sports mode as its the only mode that has full time AI Servo (without having to "trick" the camera into that mode).

I shot another race today, the first since learning some things in this thread. Putting to use some of the ideas from this thread, I got MUCH better results today. I had less than 5% throwaways today and the shots are all much better exposed and the color saturation is much better as well.

Here are two random shots I pulled from the files:

So what did you do different? Besides tipping your camera whole bunch, I mean. I feel dizzy and I think I might heave :p

Lookin better. So far motionboy's advice is the most like what I usually do. I either use flash, or find trees or something to use as background. Another option in conditions where there has to be lots of sky and you can't make it work with flash is to shoot in black and white. That way the sky would be white anyway, so it will work better. I don't do that often, but sometimes its one of the only ways to make it work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Photo-John

So what did you do different? Besides tipping your camera whole bunch, I mean. I feel dizzy and I think I might heave :p

---

Yeah that one is a bit tilted. I was standing off camber on the side of the hill and got a little carried away. Thought I'd try it and see what kind of effect it gave me. I kind of liked it.

The things I did different were as follows:
1. Made sure to shoot with the sun over my shoulder to illuminate the riders.
2. I metered the trail before the riders got there and used some manual exposures
3. Used a custom white balance

To me the second one's a bit too static and there's way too big a depth of field. There's nothing interesting in the background so it shouldn't be A: in focus B: in the image at all. That's my opinion. The first one is kind of okay, but the guy with the moustache and tights looks pretty gay, no offence. I've never shot cross country races, but I would probably shoot at the uphill section to capture the misery and agony of pedaling your way up to the top. Maybe get some shots of those weenies carrying their bikes over some technical section etc..

Okay, sorry if I'm being a baggy pants arse of a freerider, but I just don't find XC interesting.. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ouvinen

To me the second one's a bit too static and there's way too big a depth of field. There's nothing interesting in the background so it shouldn't be A: in focus B: in the image at all. That's my opinion. The first one is kind of okay, but the guy with the moustache and tights looks pretty gay, no offence. I've never shot cross country races, but I would probably shoot at the uphill section to capture the misery and agony of pedaling your way up to the top. Maybe get some shots of those weenies carrying their bikes over some technical section etc..

Okay, sorry if I'm being a baggy pants arse of a freerider, but I just don't find XC interesting.. ;)

---

These were posted as two shots that I thought had good exposure, not the most exciting shots. This thread was talking about how to get a good exposure and these shots were the "after" to show that with the helpful advice in this thread I made some improvements, or at least I think I did.

I'm pretty put off by you making a personal attack on one of the subjects. You can comment all you want on my crappy pictures, but please don't make comments about a guy who was racing 30 tough miles in 100 degree temperatures and has done a tremendous amount to promote mountain biking in this area just because you don't wear the same type of clothes. I've never understood why freeriders have to make it us vs. them, we all ride bikes lets just be happy there are multiple ways to enjoy them.

However, on your constructive comments I agree, although I was more looking for comments on the exposure. I should have (and usually do) use a smaller DOF. In this photo though, I was trying some different things which happened to be using a 5.6 f stop.

\Rant Off

Lots of good advice here. Problem is, digital has about the same exposure latitude as slide film (as in: not much!). With a backlit subject, you just can't get both the subject's face and the mid-day sky right - pick one or the other. The sky will be several stops brighter, so it will be blown out. Or the sky will be a nice blue but the subject's face is dark because it's in shadow.

Generally, with digital cameras you can pull a lot of detail out of shadow areas - but be aware that you might start getting some noise when you do that too. Might not ba a good thing on the subject's face... So, it's usually better to underexpose than overexpose with a digital camera. The reason flash helps is because it lowers the contrast. It bring's the brightness of the subject's face up to a light level closer to the sky, for example.

And, another idea like you said is to use a longer lens (less background to deal with).