Exposing for a Broad Contrast Range

[bruce]

I have now had 3 very rich experiences photographing the American

Black Bear, but I am forever fighting with exposing for the bear and

its habitat correctly. Imagine that you can photograph adults, cubs,

black phase and cinnimen phased bears clinging to trees in north woods

wilderness... sounds ideal.... right? Now envision that these bears

spend the majority of time on 'paper birch' trees. Paper birch trees

are white as paper (thus the name) while black bears are (well) black.

 

When the bears climb maples and oaks, the exposure is simple. My

general technique is to spot a highlight on the bear (preferrably the

face) and subtract 2/3 to 1 stop of light. However, when the bears are

on or around the birch trees, the trees lose all detail and often

compete with the perfectly exposed bear for the viewers attention.

 

Pertanent info: I'm shooting @ 420mm f4.0 w/ Velvia or 100VS during

the late afternoon into the evening.

 

Do you (anyone) have suggestions for exposing this broad range scene?

Please do not suggest print film, as this is not an option for my

publishing group.

 

regards

bruce

[frank_kolwicz]

I don't expect this to be much help, but at least one well known nature photographer makes large format dupes of his original slides which he manipulates like a print (dodging and burning) to extend the contrast range of the original.

 

A similar operation could be done digitally and output to film from high resolution scanners. A photographer friend has been doing this with 35mm B&Ws to get easy to print 4x5 negatives output from digitally corrected hi-res scans. And, since your publishing group probably uses digitized images in it's process, maybe you could skip the film output and not be adding much to the workflow.

 

Frank

[dan_smith]

Dump the high contrast films and shoot Astia or Sensia II. They are lower contrast and that might help a bit.

[jeff_hallett1]

If possible, look at the scene carefully and if any part of the scene

has some middle tone in it, use your spot meter on that area. Otherwise this is a difficult situation.

Maybe try metering the birch tree and add + exposure and bracket.

I also agree with Dan about the use of low contrast film

[cwphoto]

My apologies; you probably do this. Shoot in low contrast light, overcast if possible. Hopefully this still allows sufficient shutter

speed and depth-of-field.

[fredrick_sears]

Several things might help reduce the contrast:fill flash, lost the

tele convernter, lowere contrast film and finally exposure.

 

Neither Velvia or VS benefit from the contrast range of the scene you

describe Sensia Astia or another lower contrast film will better

handle the inherent contrast in the scene. Addtionally you might run

some test to see just exactly very your "whites" need to be before

they fall apart. A roll of film and notes would go a long way to

deciding exactly how much contrast your film will handle.

 

From the 420 mm @ f 4 I'm assuming you're using a 1.4 teleconvertor

this is going to ever so slightly add more contrast to a contrasty

scene.

 

lastly fill flash in the -1 to -2 department might help you tag your

highlights while keeping detail in the fur and eyes of the bear and

combining fill flash with a lower contrast film will go a long

distance to reducing the problems you seem to b

[ken_dunn]

I sometimes use a tiffen ultra contrast filter. This would allow you to expose for the tress and should still get detail in the dark areas. If you are using big glass it may be a problem getting one to fit.

[ben_greenberg]

Ken, what is a Tiffen Ultra Contrast filter? Never heard of it. While I am at it, could I ask you what your filter of choice is to warm up your color photograph appropriately under an overcast sky? Do you know if it is available in 82 mm since many filters aren't? Thanks. Ben

[bruce]

Thank you to all who responded. While it is among my least favorite films, I will carry some Sensia when I backpack in to my bear heaven this August. I also appreciate the fill-flash advice, though I do hesitate to use flash on wild animals (especially carnivores), when I am unprotected.

 

regards

bruce

[don_baccus]

Teleconverters add contrast? I've never heard that one and don't believe that.

 

E100SW handles contrasty situations very nicely in my experience, you might give that a try. 100 VS is very contrasty film IMO, though I love the color. And I'm sure you know that Velvia's also very contrasty.

 

I've shot harbor seals w/100SW on a bright white beach in afternoon sun, with a cobalt-blue harbor background, and was very impressed with its ability to hold detail in the sand while rendering the water a deep blue, rather than driving it to near-black. I've shot it in other contrasty situations and have been pleased.

 

As far as fill flash goes, you might just get hotspots on the birch that will negate the usefulness of adding light to the bears. You'll just have to experiment, I guess.

 

Have you tried shooting them on cloudy days?

[bruce]

Don,

Thanks for mentioning 100SW... I was wondering if the warmth of the SW film would add some (yellow tone) to the birch bark. In all honesty, I do not like the neutral color of sensia (or Astia), furthermore, sensia seems to vary too much from batch to batch. I have shot images of the bears under differing light conditions, & have determined that late noon/early evening provides the best light for obtaining facial and fur detail. Since all of the photography occurs under a forest canopy, overcast light, while providing a better tone for the trees, reduces shutter speeds to 1/30 or below (too slow to stop the movement of the bears). You must encounter similar situations when photographing forest raptors like Red Shouldered & Coopers Hawks.

 

regards

bruce

[michael_kronmal2]

Bears are omnivores. But your point about spooking them is well taken. It is best to not do anything to effect the subjects behavior in any way.

[bruce]

Michael,

 

Black bears belong to the order Carnivora, Family Ursidae, Genus Ursus and species americanus and while 70-80% of their diet consists of fruits, berries, nuts and insects, they do dine on rabbit, fish, deer, & squirrel and are an animal that needs to be respected. An examination of a typical black bear skull will reveal a pair of quite large canines and a dense lower jaw. If you don't object, when I am within 20 feet of a sow and her cubs, I think I will choose to leave my flash in the camera pack.

 

Regards, (& alive to leave this message),

 

bruce

[terry_danks]

Don Baccus wrote: "E100SW handles contrasty situations very nicely in my experience . . .[snip]"

 

This is contrary to my experience. I used it in bright sun on birds sitting in water and did not care for the result. Unfortunately I did not try Sensia/Astia under the same light so can not make any statements about which might be preferable. One of the better shots is posted at http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/danksta/stretch.htm

I think a less contrasty film might have served me better but am open to suggestions.

[carlos_co]

Try pulling Astia one stop.

[jeff_hallett1]

Have any of you tried Kodak EBX yet? For 11 years I have run the gamut of slide films( Velvia, Sensia, Astia, Provia,100SW and this , IMHO, is the best yet. Warm but not contrasty ,reasonably priced and the colors will make you go WOW. Try some you,ll agree I,m sure.

[stanley_mcmanus]

I have bounced around all over the place trying to control contast. Don has found E100SW to work well for him. Others disagree. I suggest this is because Don knows the film well and knows how to expose it to get the look he wantss. Don can correct me if I am wrong. Switching films frequently is an invitation to disaster IMHO. I have settled on Sensia II 100 as my film for subjects shot in constrasty light, Elite Chrome 100 for subjects shot under subdued light. Other than that I occasionally use E200 when I need the speed. I have not yet decided on using either E100VS or Velvia, partly because I don't seem to get the big thrill that others do when shooting these super saturated films.

 

Fill flash works to bring out some detail in the fur, but I am a bit shakey about being near enough to a wild bear to be able to use fill flash. I must admit that I have talked to folks who have shot bears using fill flash and they claim that the bears don't give a hoot about the flash.

 

Pulling a film is an old trick to reducing contrast. I am glad that somebody reminded us of it.

[andrewdawsongallery]

Bruce J. wrote: In all honesty, I do not like the neutral color of sensia (or Astia), furthermore, sensia seems to vary too much from batch to batch.

 

Hopefully I'm not stating the obvious, but using Provia would be the answer to this inconsistency. I've shot I dunno how many rolls and have never had a bad one. Of course, if you just don't like the film anyway...

 

My own $.02 on 100SW; seems a bit more contrasty and less warm than Provia, so I was not tempted to make a big switch.

[les_borg]

In answer to Jeff Hallett's question on EBX film: I took a free roll from my UK Amateur Photographer magazine, to Florida, in April. Frankly, it was ghastly; all the blacks seemed very blue and the blues were well O.T.T. Maybe it was that I processed the film with my Sensia rolls in standard E6 chemistry - but for what it is worth, that was my findings.

 

100 VS on the other hand looks good, but here in the UK, we can buy Sensia II 100 for around #2.40 ($1.53) a roll (NPP) and it seems perfectly good to Britains nature photographers. Hardly anybody uses Provia - as we can't see the difference - so why spend more.

[jeff_hallett1]

Boy if it were not for the opinionated nature of photographers, this forum might not exist. I think Sensia sucks but then I like warmth in my images and so do my editors and that is what counts in my book.

[dan_sapper]

Les wrote: "100 VS on the other hand looks good, but here in the UK, we can buy Sensia II 100 for around #2.40 ($1.53) a roll (NPP) and it seems perfectly good to Britains nature photographers. "

 

2.40 pounds in Britain is equivalent to about $3.99 a roll in U.S. I think he got the exchange rate backwards.