HELP: What Pro Did, What I Did: Capture Sky

[wuyeah]

Hello Guys,

 

**I SHOOT FILM ONLY**

I have been trying very very hard to nail this......but.....non of them are successful......

It is the best to use image to explain my question. Please click the following:

 

http://www.photo.net/photo/4658771

 

As you all can see. My picture is city scene with a day of awsome sunset. in order for me to capture

the true color of what i see in sky, this is the result I got.....I got the sky, but no forground middle

ground. If I try to get forground, I can't get the sky color. As you can see the PRO picture. same in the

city, the sky color is vivid and great, but forground is in great detail in light. I figure this is 100% meter

problem, than anything else.

 

Meter: SPOT. As habit, i am almost always shooting in spot meterig.

How i did: I meter the sky i get sky color, but dark forground. I meter the forground, i will never get

the sky color. Should I meter the middle ground?

 

I think those picture were not use any flash. first, flash can't reach that far for all forground. second,

forground just doesn't has the flash use feel.

 

I have brows checked through books about landscape shooting. A lot of books: DON"T TELL YOU HOW.

They only tells you that pictuer is taken for example: f/22 with 1 sec. exposure.

 

My question: f/22 ? Such a small aperture to take picture as such? 1 sec doesn't seem enough to

recieve light for such small aperture. Not even meantion, they have to get the forground as well....

 

My experience that I hardly never ever use aperture over f5.6, except very bright day light. f/22 with

1sec. Doesn't seem to be understandable to my knowledge. What I want to achieve is what i did with

the sky with clearer forground. I never able to be successful somehow. I am struggled. What did I do

wrong? How can I change my shooting to achieve it as most of all pro did?

Should I start use f/22? f/11 might help?

 

Please help me, I have not been sleep well because of it. It bother me so so much.....

[jimstrutz]

Too much contrast for the film to record. You don't mention which film, and some are better than others at recording a wide range of light intensity. Some pro grades of portrait film might do a little better than other negative film. Just about any negative (print) film will be better than any slide film in this regard. Generally better than digital too.

 

You could try using a graduated neutral density filter, but in your case you would need to sandwich two of them at different angles to darken the sky where you want it. Another solution would be to take two identical picures (using a tripod), metering for the sky for one and the foregound for the other. Then scan both and merge them in a photo editing program. Of course, you could try to take the picture before the foreground gets so dark. That might not work in this case though, as the sunlight's effect on the clouds is quite fleeting.

[robert x]

William -

 

as well as that, you are not comparing like with like. The lake shot has the lake to reflect

the sky and the shot below seems to be taken much earler in the day. The Paris photo

seems to have a much more dramatic sky anyway - the clouds are much larger and the

sun seems much stronger. Also the Paris shot was taken from a high vantage point

looking down so the camera picks out light that it can see from above. That space by the

tower is very open as well. Your shot is taken from ground level and from in between

buildings......

r

[wayne_haas]

William: first off: the pro shots on the left side really have nothing to do with the problem you are trying to solve -- i.e., compensate for a scene that has a contrast range that exceeds the capabilities of the film you are using. There is a chance that a graduated neutral density filter was used by the pro for the Paris evening scene, but having never been there I cannot provide a definite comment.

 

As you did not mention what spot meter or film you are using, I cannot provide you specific advice on that matter either. In a more general sense, I would meter the highlight and shadow areas in which I wish to retain details, and then determine first what the corresponding contrast range is. As I generally use slide film -- for such a scene I would probably use relatively low contrast films such as Astia or Kodak EPN -- there is a usable range of roughly 4 - 4.5 stops to work within; negative film has somewhat more latitude. If the results were outside that range, and an appropriate graduated ND was not handy, one would either need to choose whether the highlights or shadow areas were more important, or average-out the readings (a possible compromise solution, but in this instance would likely result in a 'muddy shot' with a somewhat burned-out sky). In the instance of the scene you shot, I would probably have let the sky blow out somewhat (possibly by about a stop) to get a bit more detail in the foreground, or perhaps may have simply decided to stand back and 'take in the scene' without taking a shot.

 

As far as using a graduated ND correspondingly: this would have been possible, but would have been difficult due to the angled outside edges of the dark areas -- chances are two filters would need to be angled strategically to 'make the scene'. The Paris shot is far simpler in this instance as the horizon is straight and well defined: a hard edge ND would be quite suitable in this instance, as the graduated edge could have been placed to fit just under the horizon line and remained inconspicuous.

 

I am aware that I have made no mention of what ND graduated filters do. To be honest I would rather not get bogged down in the mechanics, just think what ND filters are used for and what graduated implies respectively in that context. There is a wealth of information on corresponding technique on the web, do some leg work yourself and do a search (or two ... )

 

Something that is implicit in your query is that you seem to be looking for prescriptions re. technique; I would instead recommend that you need to learn to 'read a scene' and make appropriate judgements as what to do depending on what you wish to achieve. That can only come from experience, which generally means taking chances and asking 'why does this shot work/does not work' and 'how can I make it better'.

[pico_digoliardi]

William, look carefully at the pro's pictures and you will see that it is the light that makes the difference. (It usually is in photography!) In his contrasty shot he's got sunlight striking the buildings at an oblique angle. He made an exposure that just captured what was needed, letting the shadows be okay as dark. Your scene has no similar light striking the buidings. You may not be able to do a thing about that for your particular scene.

 

Other 'pro' pictures are a bit flatter, and besides you do not know if they have been manipulated.

 

If it does not violate your sense of purity, you can use Photoshop CS2's HDR facility or the free HDR.EXE, but that's another story.

[colin carron]

William, 2 things : - it looks to me as though you have waited a little too long before taking the exposure so the foreground is too dark. Light changes fast at these times and at a certain point you get the best combination of light on the foreground and light on the sky.

 

: - and as commented you are also expecting too wide an exposure latitude in the film. Make sure the scene does not exceed the exposure latitude of your film - normally about 5 stops for slide and a bit more for print. So, meter the foreground and assume it will be at the darker part of your exposure latitude, meter the sky which will be at the lighter part, and see how many stops in between. If it is beyond the exposure latitude of the film you need to use the appropriate ND grad to bring the sky within the exposure latitude. Even with all the calculation it will be a bit hit and miss so trial and error will apply. Good luck!

[jimitoucan]

The Pro Paris shot is most likely two images, sky and tower, merged in computer. I suspect

the lower left is either two images or good use of split ND. Notice the building is brighter

white while the clouds are golden yellow.

 

Pros use what ever it take to get an image that sells, especially for ads, where the money is.