 Linda M. Mishler |
Portraits of white/black couple? How do I shoot a couple that has very contrasting skin tones?She is very white,he is very black.
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
W. |
Shoot RAW. Then in the conversion create 2 images: one exposure adjusted for her, the other exposure adjusted for him. Then blend/merge 'm. HDRI, really.
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Pete H |
Everyone likes to make more out of this shooting scenario than is necessary. Here is a "snap" shot, taken a couple yrs ago with my D-70 in jpeg! Not a high quality camera by todays standards at all..esp in dynamic range. Perhaps this image approximates what you are facing. Lighting is everything for a shot like this. Ambient + balanced fill is all you really need.
Pete
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Jerry Frazier |
Measure the ambient light and shoot. It's really, really, really, really easy. And, you do not have to shoot RAW and do a double exposure. That's just complete nonsense. If you shoot in manual, it's easy-peasy. If you use your in-camera meter, though, you will have trouble because you'll be metering off black or white, and either of those measures will be wrong. A hand held meter would help alot.
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
A C |
lighting and make sure the background looks good. A really dark or bright background might make it harder to see some of the people. a double exposure might work for just one photo. But processing several photos would be too time consuming ... especially since you'd have to spend a great deal of time with the details (you don't want phony halo effects around your subjects).
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
W. |
I was talking from the assumption of a formal portrait session. Where image quality is everything. In an impromptu situation – that some mistakenly call 'candid photography' – you may not have that luxury/consideration to take into account. In that scenario Jerry's handheld meter is not an option either, of course. I'm with Cheryl and Pete for practical applications in unplanned scenarios. Like Pete said, lighting is of course everything. Avoid hard contrasts with light, background, and surroundings.
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Jerry Frazier |
I'm having trouble with this because if you properly meter, it doesn't matter if he is black and she is white. A proper exposure will see the scene properly, just like your eyes see it. It has nothing to do with anything else. But, maybe we are all saying the same thing. A hand held meter takes less than 3 seconds to read. So, that is viable. An HDR image is NEVER worth it unless you just want to, or they are paying you gobs and gobs of money. Otherwise it's a waste of time. I've shot many portraits of this type, and I am here to tell you all that you must be doing something different than me. Because a properly metered scene will provide the correct result. And, it isn't hard to do. Look at the meter in your camera, take a shot, look at the image, blinking highlights, and histogram (which I always do all this in ANY given situation), adjust shot, check, and do this until it's right, and then shoot away. You guys are talking about the light reflecting off the subject and tricking the camera one way or the other. I'm talking about simply manually adjusting the exposure until it is proper, and then it doesn't matter if people are white or black, you get a proper exposure.
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
W. |
Yeah. But a handheld meter is not convenient when shooting 'off the hip'.
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Pete H |
Jerry, You are 100% correct. " A proper exposure will see the scene properly,..." Therein is the difficulty for many, many amateur shooters. You would be amazed at how many people do not understand the concept of a "proper exposure." While true that "blinking hi-lites" is an indication of blown bi-lites, it should not be the only guide in evaluating a scene. Nor should the LCD review screen or the histogram. The latter is still probably the best in the field when we are unsure.
I've looked at many articles on the internet, in books etc..it is amazing how much mis-information is out there concerning exposure. This is a great thread; perhaps we should start a new one in the concepts of "proper Exposure?" all the best, Pete
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Oliver Anderson |
When I was younger I was given a citation for improper exposure...but I was young and immature.
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
- Carlton Ward Contact Carlton Ward Carlton Ward's Gallery |
Thanks for NOT posting that picture Oliver :) Now if you have any of your models :o)
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Jerry Frazier |
Pete, I agree. That's why I am suggesting a light meter. That's a really great way to start to understand exposure and how the camera is fooled. It takes a little time to learn why that is happening. Once you discover why it happens, then people want to start understanding flash and balancing ambient light. Once you get that, you start to looking at well-lit images from great photographers and start to understand how awesome they really are.
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
I heard you can shoot from 30ft at f/11 and do it.
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||||||||