8 replies to this topic

[zoutedrop]

Took this shot in overcast and rain.  Iridescence is nothing more than a mirror.  

F8, ISO 1250, 1/80 sec, 270 mm, flash compulsory, aperture priority, spot metering 

Is there any way I can keep the iridescent feathers from blowing out?  I suppose I can go to full manual, if so what settings?   

 

Attached Files

•  ANHU.jpg   280.49K   4 downloads

[noahcomet]

There's no manual setting that's going to do the trick in all situations, but I'm a fan of M mode generally.  (I know others prefer Tv or Av mode---this is just my preference.)

First things first, blowing out highlights isn't always a bad thing---sometimes it can actually be a nice effect if handled well.  I don't think it's a real problem in this particular image.

The real question is how are you (or your camera) metering for the shot?  If you use an averaging metering mode, your camera's going to try to get maximum detail in both the bright and dark parts of the frame---this works well sometimes, but in an image with a high dynamic range, the bright spots will probably be overexposed and the dark parts will be underexposed.  If you're spot-metering for a medium to dark part of the frame, the highlights will be blown out, but the dark areas will be exposed properly.  If you meter for the highlights, those will be great, but the dark areas will be underexposed.  There's often no happy medium---you have to choose: will the image look better with blown out highlights or underexposed shadows?  (Those of us who frequently photograph Bald Eagles must grapple with this question all the time---white head, dark brown body = difficult subject!)  This is part of the reason why ideal light for shooting wildlife is usually just after dawn and right before dusk---or on an overcast day.  You want sunlight, but too much of it (especially if it's directly overhead) is a bad thing.  And direct flash-light usually just makes things worse.  If you must use flash, try to bounce it off of something.

Of course nowadays, Photoshop makes all things possible.  You can independently adjust the highlights and shadows in post-processing.  If you're going to do post-processing (which I always do), it's best to expose "to the right"---meaning overexpose.  You can usually darken a slightly overexposed shot without ill effect---but when you try to brighten an underexposed shot, you run the risk of introducing grainy noise to the picture.  So go ahead and blow out the highlights---then, in post-processing, just darken the highlights.  Voila---a perfectly (if slightly improbably) exposed shot.

 On a different topic---1/80 is very slow for 270mm.  Unless you're on a tripod or using Image Stabilization, I'd suggest keeping the shutter above 1/500 to avoid motion blur.

[lonestranger]

Matt:

Took this shot in overcast and rain.  Iridescence is nothing more than a mirror.  

F8, ISO 1250, 1/80 sec, 270 mm, flash compulsory, aperture priority, spot metering 

Is there any way I can keep the iridescent feathers from blowing out?  I suppose I can go to full manual, if so what settings?   

 

I don't have a lot of luck with flash photography because I don't really know what I am doing, but one thing that has helped me out on occasion, is adjusting the flash compensation along with the exposure compensation. In this situation, I would have tried adjusting the flash compensation by -1 and adjust the exposure compensation by +1, or something similar. I have no idea if that would solve your problem, but that's how I'd start to try to compensate for what looks like just a little too much flash to me. Finding the magic setting of flash and exposure would be trial and error and vary considerably depending on the distance to your subject. It might not be the right approach, but since I don't really know what I am doing when it comes to flash photography, I don't know what else to suggest. If there's major flaws in my suggestion, I hope someone with more flash experience can correct me and explain a better approach.

On a personal note, I am not a fan of spot metering and prefer center weighted metering. The problem I have with spot metering is in finding the right spot to meter. Using your photo as an example, or any bird for that matter, if you focus on the eye and you're using spot metering, the camera will set the exposure based on the brightness of the eye, and the eye only. The camera will think that the eye is in the middle of the brightness scale, when it's actually at the lower end of the scale. This can be worked around by using exposure lock, but without exposure lock, the camera will meter your focus point as middle scale brightness and adjust the rest of the image accordingly. By using center weighted metering, the camera will meter not just the eye it's focused on, but it will meter more of the bird and set the exposure with more awareness of what surrounds the focus point. Spot metering is very precise and has many practical uses, but as far as bird photography goes my logic is this, I want to expose my pictures so that the bird is exposed properly. I don't use matrix metering because I don't care if the trees or the sky at the edges of the frame are exposed properly and I don't use spot metering because I want the entire bird exposed correctly, not just my focus point. I know we all have our personal preferences, center weighted metering is my preference for the reasons mentioned.

[lyceel]

I'm with lonestranger on using flash compensation with exposure compensation.  Essentially, what you get in this case is that your foreground exposure is controlled by the flash compensation (the light from the flash dominates the foreground), and your background exposure is controlled by the normal exposure compensation (the ambient light dominates the background).   On cloudy days in the woods, when I'm using the flash, I tend to start at around -2 for the flash and +1 for the exposure and work from there.  It seems to produce the most natural looking shots.  I don't shoot hummers a lot, though, so YMMV.

[zoutedrop]

Thanks for the feedback, I will work the suggestions this weekend and provide some feedback.  As usual, very well thought out. 

Thanks guys.

[Doug Herr]

lonestranger:

On a personal note, I am not a fan of spot metering and prefer center weighted metering. The problem I have with spot metering is in finding the right spot to meter. Using your photo as an example, or any bird for that matter, if you focus on the eye and you're using spot metering, the camera will set the exposure based on the brightness of the eye, and the eye only. The camera will think that the eye is in the middle of the brightness scale, when it's actually at the lower end of the scale. This can be worked around by using exposure lock, but without exposure lock, the camera will meter your focus point as middle scale brightness and adjust the rest of the image accordingly.

 

I'm a huge fan of spot metering when combined with manual mode.  When in manual mode you don't need to meter from the center of the image.  What I typically do is meter from an average tone and set the exposure, then re-compose to focus and make the exposure.  I don't use exposure lock or exposure compensation at all.

[lonestranger]

Doug Herr:

I'm a huge fan of spot metering when combined with manual mode.  When in manual mode you don't need to meter from the center of the image.  What I typically do is meter from an average tone and set the exposure, then re-compose to focus and make the exposure.  I don't use exposure lock or exposure compensation at all.

I can't question your method, Doug, your photographs prove that you definitely know what you're doing. I have only tried manual mode in a few unique situations, and with limited success. My problem with manual mode, and it's more of a mental block than a real problem, is that I am not the least bit confident in being able to select an average tone with spot metering any better than the camera can with center weighted metering. I use aperture priority with the aperture wide open to start, I set the ISO high enough to give me the desired shutter speed, and then after a test shot I will tweak the shutter speed with exposure compensation if needed. In essence I am sort of shooting manual, but not in manual mode. You would think that the transition to manual would be fairly easy since I am already setting the aperture, ISO, and tweaking the shutter speed to my liking. I guess I like to rely on the camera getting the exposure close because I'm afraid that finding the right exposure myself might take too long and I might miss the shot. I know a little bit of practice in manual mode would go a long way, but I'm afraid of not being able to determine the right adjustments and get them set fast enough to get the shot without a bit of help from the camera. Like I said, it's a mental block but I will definitely be using spot metering when I finally overcome it, using any other metering in manual just wouldn't make sense.

[canon eos]

Yes, whether you use/prefer Manual or Av or Tv it is how you work with those settings. That becomes your base, and from there you adjust/compensate as needed.

In this case you were up against your limits. The D90 at ISO 1250 in poor lighting is hard to yield good results, and as noted, 1/80 sec at 270mm is challenging.

And, sometimes it comes down to accepting a 'record' shot if that is important, or deleting it until a high(er) quality image is obtained.

[cabirds]

I'm totally in agreement with Doug - Spot metering and full manual.  Especially if I'm trying to capture something like a Great Egret where there's a lot of delicacy in the extremes and I have to dance around between blown-out and muck.  But if you have really jumpy subjects, the Warblers are a good example, being able to catch them in that perfect moment really is most repeatable for me in AV.

I noticed the OP mentioned a wide-open lens.  Most long lenses really just don't do that well wide-open.  Stopping down a stop or two will tend to give a much crisper, sharper, more constrasty result.  Some of my earlier bird photos really reflect that mistake, I'm still cleaning out and reshooting that junk.  Also less opportunity for CA (Chromatic Aberration) to rear its ugly head.  Of course, if you're fortunate enough to be sitting on top of a 3rd Gen f/4 600mm Canon L-IS, then I stand corrected. ;)

 Here's a rainy-day Anna's. He's all wet and miserable looking, rain-drops falling around him, but still singing away. This was 1600 ISO, f/7.1 (AV), and it was metered from the branch he's sitting on.  Most of the detail is preserved, although there's a little blow-out.  [Canon 50D + Tamron 200-500 Di/LD, handheld]