High Key or Over-Exposed?

[ggoodroe]

In light of the Photo of the week....this is a serious question.

 

What is the difference between a High Key Photo and over-exposure?

Is it only Artistic impression?

 

Thanks,

George Goodroe

St. Petersburg, Florda USA

[dawn devoe]

I'm new to portraiture. I had difficulty with that question as well. That is an excerpt from, "

Master Lighting Guide for Portrait Photographers". Excellent book, btw.

 

Christopher Grey writes, " Many people think that high-key means overexposure, but that is

not the case. Overexposure is an entirely different tool. "High key" simply means that the vast

majority of tones in the image are above middle gray, including any shadows. Excluding

specular highlights, such as catchlights, there usually is detail even in the brightest areas."

 

That is an from, " Master Lighting Guide for Portrait Photographers".

[snakecharmer]

Good question. I guess it's a subjective thing. In theory, high key would be intentional and overexposure would be accidental, but the viewer is not necessarily going to be able to tell the difference. To me, a high key photograph is "blown out" colorwise, but the enough of the necessary lines are still intact to keep the composition meaningful...which is why I think it's subjective!

[paulmoore]

subject matter has to be on the lighter side as well.. tough to shoot high key on a black

seamless...

[tobiasfeltus]

Pardon me, but i am remotely confused by all of your answers. assuming that this was shot in B&W, and hence a negative, high key would be obtained by under-exposing, my guess 2 to 3 stops. hypothetically detail could be brought back into the thin shadows by over-developing. You all appear to be talking about it as if it were reversal film. This kind of effect can also easily be obtained from digital in PS by giving an 'S' shaped curve in RGB, hence flattening the highlights and shadows, and dropping the detail range of the mid tones.

 

but to answer the question, i believe it is subjective. exposure is subjective as well, and i find myself exposing at -1.5 stops most of the time (incident) to obtain the 'feel' that i wish to obtain.

 

t+

[lex_jenkins]

The better examples of high key photography I've seen had very low contrast subject and lighting. Tones run the full gamut from A to B, maybe C. This enables greater control over the exposure without risk of overexposure. Think birch tress in dense fog.

[eric merrill]

My opinion is that the photo of the week is overexposed. Look at its histogram. A high key will be biased toward the right, but without completely blowing all the highlights.

 

 

Eric

[emwalker]

Where I come from,overexposed implies: a) shooting with a shutter speed that is relatively long, allowing enough photons to penetrate the lens and fall on the film, that areas are created which lose visible detail on the film or positive print; or b)an aperture that is (relatively) large is used such that the same happens. Now, if you're shooting negative film, it's gonna basically turn the developed product black, so that the paper onto which you transfer your print is going to stay un(or "under-") exposed. If you're shooting a positive print, slide, etc, the dark original is going to turn clear or white, so that when it's viewed you can't make any detail out of all or parts of the shot. Hope this helps, feltus. For all that, up and down are really relative too. People in Australia aren't upside down, in Australia. However, based on the orientation of their heads to their feet, most of them would be upside down if you put moved them here without rotating them. A wise man once said, 'there is water at the bottom of the ocean.' Think on that for a while T+. Meanwhile, let's talk about the question posed in this forum.

Yes, high key is defined by some as a certain proportion of the tones in the overall shot being 'brighter' than a set luminosity. Theoretically, this can be acheived with light backgrounds and colors and lots of light so the shot's not 'overexposed,' but just overall quite bright. However, many times shots that are 'properly' exposed but not 'high-key' can be brightened and increased in contrast to create a 'hot' effect that looks good. And it is what looks good that counts, right? Overexposure and underexposure are relative to your perception, as there is no 'correct' exposure for any shot, only an estimation of what exposure will show what you want to see in your final product. I assume Feltus is interjecting his take on exposure as the printing process is concerned... photoshop has switched the meaning of 'dodge' and 'burn'; but what we're talking about in 'over-' and 'under-' exposure is as regards the exposure of the film in the camera, so don't let this guy confuse you. Good luck.

 

-e-

[emwalker]

As for the photo of the week, it seems to me to be both high-key and, for my taste, a tad overexposed. However, the model's skin tone seems rather light to start, and the background is white, so this photo is by strict definition going to be 'high-key' at an exposure that I think most people would feel is 'correct'. A little contrast adjustment, as well, could bring out the lines in this photo and give an impression of 'better' or 'closer' exposure, though some skin detail and detail in the background is going to be lost due to the brightness- this is intentional in this case as far as I can tell, and had the artist wanted to include all those fine details he/she(I didn't look) would have used a different exposure/light scheme to acheive it.

 

: )

[steve_levine]

High key, refers to a scene with it's tones all between mid gray and white. Low key, is a scene with all it's tones between mid gray and black. There isn't any "subjective mystery" to this.

[marshall]

My understanding was that high-key simply means having a preponderance of the tones above a mid-tone. So a high-key image could, technically, even have some pure black in it. The inverse would be true for a low-key shot - it could even have white, but that a preponderance of the tones would be darker than middle grey.

[jonathan brewer]

The word 'key' in the term 'high key', is the 'key' to all this, it's a reference to the intensity of the key light, suggestive of it's use on the subject matter in the foreground. If you're talking about the Photo of the week, and if I'm looking at the right shot, you could keep the exposure the same on this young lady, and place her in front of a black background, and it would still be a 'high key' shot, piling light into a white background behind your foreground subject matter which is being illuminated 'high key' will certainly accentuate the 'high key' look, but having a darker background doesn't change the 'high key' illumination of your foreground subject.

 

Regarding 'high key', it's how it's used, not the idea of what the result is supposed to look like, if you go to my website,.... . www.imageandartifact.bz ....and go to the 'about us' section, you'll see a self portrait/family shot, it's extreme high key, my wife's skin is 1-2 shades above 'black as the ace of spades', looking at her in person, to give you an idea of how many stops her skin has been ovexposed, the background I used on this shot IS BLACK, well, it isn't black in the shot, the knit black sweaters I had the members of my family wear, suck up nothing but light since they're made of knit, they stayed black, the black background started to go 'dark grey' because it was smooth. I used a red filter, which lightens the red in skin, some diffusion, along with piling a lot of light over what my meter indicated when measuring my key, to get a kind of porcelain type skintone I was looking for.

 

Does my shot in the 'about us' section of my website look like the shot of the pale skinned girl in the 'photo of the week' image? No, are they both 'high key'? Yes,..........I think where folks get tripped up, when it comes to understanding 'high key, is confusing the use of the technique, with the end result/the expectation that only a shot where everything(foreground and background) looks close to blown out/blown out,.........in the case of the 'about us' image of my family, including my wife, I used 'high key', along w/a red filter for a certain 'effect', even though she's dark skinned and the background was black when I started shooting.

 

The issue isn't whether something is/isn't 'high key', because everything in the scene including foreground/background looks real white, the point is that you can use more illumination than your meter says, and that means a little, or a lot, to change the 'look' of your foreground subject matter in your scene,............'high key' is the use of 'high key', not the one expected result.

[jonathan brewer]

The advantage of using an exposure different than what your meter says that folks would have to be able to 'eyeball' the original scene and compare it to the final image/final result, looking at my wife in the 'about us' shot, it would be impossible for anyone to get a sense of what her skin, or the background really looked like, unless I tell you like I did in this thread.

 

If I had my wife and kids dressed in wardrobe close to medium grey, sitting in front of a medium grey background, with same overexposure on the foreground as the 'about us' the shot would've looked 'washed out', I used the manipulation of wardrobe to create the illusion that the shot ISN'T terribly washed out/isn't washed out at all, the 'high key' illumination I used was confined to just where I wanted it, the skintones.

[jonathan brewer]

I mis-spoke, what I should've said was, 'because of the manipulation of wardrobe and background, the use of extreme 'high key' gave me the effect I wanted, which was to change the look of the skintones of the foreground subject matter'.

[snakecharmer]

Jonathan, I agree with what you are saying in that it was my understanding that the end result of a high key photograph is not necessarily a washed-out-looking photograph, or one in which all shades fall above a set point, but one in which the tones that are present are a couple of shades lighter than they are in reality. I have most often seen this technique used to accentuate the fine details in eyes, or to make something that is normally so dark that it would fade into the shadows stand out a little better. Of course a dark-skinned person can be photographed in a high key manner. I guess that these would be more functional and less conspicuous uses of the technique, with the opposite end of the spectrum being photos that are 'artistically blown-out' to achieve a specific emotional response. So, yeah, I totally agree with your aesthetic views on this.

 

To all, with regard to the under- vs. overexposure argument... Radiographic films start out light and darken as the x-rays cause the silver ions to form metallic silver on the film. The interaction with the energy source (x rays) is the exposure; an overexposure in this case means too dark/too much time spent exposed to the energy source. Rads are much different than film in that there is a latent, invisible image that we only see post-processing; no negatives. On the other hand, film negatives start out dark, then become lighter with exposure to light source; 'overexposure' in this case equals 'too light'. But these are the negatives. When you reverse the shades in processing, 'too light' becomes 'too dark'. So yeah, assuming that the artist of the photo in question used FILM, we may be mis-speaking. For those of us who use predominantly DIGITAL, 'overexposed' is a direct reflection of the amount of light being captured, so given that the default LCD screen is black, it is not technically wrong to think of a too-bright image as being overexposed. This is likely also the reason for the switch in meanings of 'burn' and 'fade' in Pshop...because once something's in the computer, it basically becomes a digital image composed of pixels (0,1 combos) even if it didn't start that way. On the same lines, a photo that is altered in Pshop to have a blown-out appearance is not technically over-(or under-, depending on camera used, and where you come from!) exposed, because there was no real alteration in amount of photons; the more appropriate terms would be under- or overprocessed--digitally so, if done in Pshop. But do we really want to think about all that crap? Nah. Being a photographer is WAY more fun than doing hard science.

[emwalker]

Whaaaaaa...? My head is spinning. All this techno mumbojumbo is more than i can ponder, being on spring break and all. Every term has a definition or two, and every term has a common use, and it's always a drag hearing people debate what it really all means. If you want strict definitions, take a class or read abook, and then you can profeess all day about how wrong someone else's usage is. However, I still insist that the end result is what we're all really after. Yall aint really a word, but i guess you guys probably understand what I'm saying when I call all yall yall, or guys, for that matter... whew! Maybe Aussies really are upside down after all.

 

Thanks for the corectness, JB, it is an interesting argument you make.

 

Now I'm going to forget all this and go take some pictures...

 

: )

 

-e-

[jonathan brewer]

You don't have to be a slave to a light meter, an indicated exposure from a light meter, and the exposure used which gives the subject matter the look you want/where it looks right, are two different things,.........a reasoned manipulation of exposure to achieve some desired effect, is different than a miscalculation that washes everything out, one is a tool that either works or it doesn't, the other is an outright mistake. A mistake as in the result looks 'garish', 'harsh', and tones and colors washed out to the point of fading out of existence.

 

The whole point is did what you try work? I know what works and doesn't work for me, but I see work where everything in the frame looks washed out and instead of simply admitting that, the artist tries to pawn off a blunder as something they had intended in the first place, rationalizing that it is you, unwilling to look at the work w/an open mind, that is the real problem.

 

To me, 'high key' is a high energy 'look', at least that's how I use it/decide when to use it, high key/low key is something you use if it makes your image a lot more fun 2 look at, gives it some more interest, some more sparkle if that's your intent,........to make the image unique, and not muddy, boring, and mundane.

 

Usually this effect is discussed in its extreme, that is folks to tend to discuss extreme high key, when it's so much more than that, piling in some more illumination for some 'pop' is 'high key', not just a girl w/pale skin in front of a white background, exposed to where she looks like she's going to heaven,..........'high key' is essentially a term then, to give you an idea of how your key was/is being used on your foreground subject matter, and it does that/explains that, in a way that the term 'overexpose' can't.

 

You use the term 'overexpose'/'overexposed' regarding an image, it can mean you messed up/made a mistake,.............you can also suggest that you intentionally overexposed to bring out the detail in your subject matter,.........and in doing so, you're trying to improve how your image looks, as opposed to making everything look washed out.

 

The term 'high key' is simply more of a descriptive term than over/underexposure when talking about manipulating your keylight in a certain way, and the term has been used this way in the motion picture industry/still photography for years, it can run the gamut from just over what your meter indicates, to 4-5 stops above a meter reading, in order to achive an effect, change a tone, give the subject matter more 'pop', more sparkle, make the subject matter more dreamlike,.......this all makes sense and these effects have been associated w/the term 'high key' for years,..................................as opposed to the term 'overexpose/'overexposed', which doesn't tell you anything, which is precisely why we're having this discussion.

 

'Overexpose'/'underexpose' indicates just that, more than/less than what's indicated, the terms don't say anything about the reasons/why, ....the term 'high key' has been associated w/everything we discussed above,.....for some sparkle/some 'pop'/high energy/brings out some more detail/it looks better than the indicated.

 

You use 'high key' because it makes the image/a part of the image look better, not worse, and that is the most important difference between 'High key' and 'overexposed'.

[emwalker]

OK, my head just exploded. I hope you're happy now.

[jonathan brewer]

When your head starts to hurt, quit reading.

[snakecharmer]

Jonathan, when you're in vet school, it just doesn't work that way. You can NEVER stop reading! ( :

[jonathan brewer]

In that case, let's hope he/she can grow another head.

[ronald_l._marvin]

The term ﾓkeyﾔ refers to the tone of the final image. The elements of the image that

influence the tone are the color of the background, the color of clothing used, and the

color of any props or foreground elements. Images that have a consistent key have much

more of an impact that those whose elements are not consistent.

 

Low key images are created using a dark background and dark clothing and props. You

can identify the key of an image by determining the average tone for the scene.

 

A low key image will have more dark elements than bright ones. Clothing and background

might be black or dark browns giving the feeling of drama or rigidity. Low key images may

also be shot with a higher lighting ratio near 3:1 as contrast is acceptable due to the

drama of a lower tone.

 

A high key image may involve the use of a white or off white background and brighter

clothing. A high key image can be challenging as it requires a great deal of light control

and has the most risk of overexposure and loss of detail. Usually a high key image will

have a low lighting ratio near 2:1. A common background for a high key image is paper

which is slightly overexposed resulting in a pure white seamless background and a feeling

of cleanliness. Care must be taken to separate the subject from the background to

eliminate shadows. High key images also tend to require more light and thus more power

and lighting equipment to create.

 

The background you use can set the tone for the image and as such, key should be a

consideration as you contemplate the image you are going to create. Your background

should not take focus off of the subject, but rather help lead the eye to the subject in the

final image. Take time to identify your overall tone, or key before you arrange the lighting

setup and you may be surprised at the results you can achieve.

 

I've included a sample of each:

[ronald_l._marvin]

OK, this try the photo again:<div></div>

[jonathan brewer]

"The term ?key? refers to the tone of the final image. The elements of the image that influence the tone are the color of the background, the color of clothing used, and the color of any props or foreground elements. Images that have a consistent key have much more of an impact that those whose elements are not consistent.

 

Low key images are created using a dark background and dark clothing and props. You can identify the key of an image by determining the average tone for the scene."...........................With all due respect to you, that's 100% wrong..............................The term 'key' in 'high key' refers to the illumination your keylight,........buy a book on Cinematography and look up the term 'keylight', and then the term 'highkey', and it will say what I'm saying, that one term('highkey') is a reference to the intensity of the illumination of the other term('keylight'), it's the same principle in still photography.

 

High key refers to the intensity of the light you're shining on the foreground sujbect matter,............it's the light you shine on something that determines its tonality,.....................light a candle in the middle a large gymnasium painted w/white walls, and you end up with a BLACK ROOM,............increase the amount of light in the gym and you get grey walls,...........pile in even more light in the gym and the walls will start to look white.

 

Using 'High key' illumination on a foreground subject, means that the 'high key' illumination of your foreground subject is 'high key' no matter what the background looks like, it doens't make any difference if it's white or black,................how you illuminate the background, whatever color or tone it happens to be, IS DIFFERENT.

 

In portraiture there are terms like 'Key' refering to your 'keylight, and 'high key'(still refering to the keylight) which means the BOOSTING UP the intensity of your keylight. You also have the term 'background light', refering to the light that illuminates your background,.........now in scenario where one light illuminates everything, foreground and background, it's still 'high key'.

 

The problem here is the mindset that a white wall used as a background, somehow determines whether or not you've used 'highkey', it doens't. Here's what you said,............................................'The elements of the image that influence the tone are the color of the background,'.......................How much illumination you shine on the FOREGROUND AND BACKGROUND determine what the tonality will be in the final image.

 

'High key' illumination of a foreground subject, with a white background is ONE VERSION of 'high key', and one version only, you don't have to have a white background to shoot 'high key', you can run the gamut in the color and tone of your background to black,........and if you're using 'high key' illumination on a subject in front of that black background, it's plain and simple 'high key'.

 

The principle of 'high key' has been around in Cinematography/Still Photography for a 100 years or more,..................shoot a foreground subject w/'high key'illumination in front of a white background, then change the background to a black background,...........the images will look different, but you haven't changed the fact that you've used 'high key' on the foreground subject matter. Forget ONE KIND OF LOOK as the principle of high key.

 

Here's my version of a high key shot, I've uploaded this image before and if memory serves me right, it's several stops above my indicated meter reading taken in from of Dayna's face, the background is medium grey, not white, and it's 'high key'<div></div>

[jonathan brewer]

You can play around w/your wardrobe, your background, you can use a white background or a black one, or anything in between, and if you use 'high key' illumination of the foreground subject matter, it's a shot involving the use of 'high key' period.

 

Here's a semi-silhouette, foreground illumination is extremely low, there's NO LIGHT on the background, can you tell me what the original tone of the background was? Before you guess, I can tell you that the original tone of the background didn't have ANYTHING to do w/final look of the shot.

 

This shot is low key, or more to the point almost no key.<div></div>