View Poll Results: which photo do you like best

Voters
13. You may not vote on this poll
  • f20

    0 0%
  • f22

    0 0%
  • f29

    1 7.69%
  • f32

    2 15.38%
  • f36

    10 76.92%
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: bud shot exposure test

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    high up in a cheese hut
    Posts
    219

    Lightbulb bud shot exposure test

    So I'm about to shoot my year cured buds thread and was wondering which exposure people liked best

    So I shot a sweetblue mystery seed bud as an example.

    took 5 shots each with a different aperture.
    f20

    f22

    f29

    f32

    f36


    So which one is it?
    Which do you like best and why?
    Last edited by trichomefarmer; 01-06-2008 at 02:29 PM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    16

    Default

    As a graphic designer who uses photoshop a lot for color correction and making sure it will be printable for offset printing. i have chosen f36. The histogram reveals the contrast will be better than the others. I would bring your white point down a little though and add some unsharp masking to it.
    Last edited by Subadai; 01-06-2008 at 06:46 PM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,625

    Default

    I would choose the f36 as well, especialy as it darkens the background much more profoundly and in that way makes the bud stand out even more imo.


    Peace
    Bubbleman

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    14

    Default

    Hiya Trichome farmer.Nice tosee you here Hope all is well and by the way wish you a Happy New Year full of bubble!

    Yep , f36 it is .

    I prefer to underexpose a bit most of the times, especially when shooting reflective/refractive objects that show bright highlights , cause its easier to push the exposure upwards in post (especially if you work with RAW files that have quite high dynamic range compared to standard 8 bit images) ,..than recover detail in overexposed-burned highlights areas .
    Last edited by L33t; 01-09-2008 at 05:06 AM.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    30

    Default

    first off are you using a flash when shooting?

    even beeing a 1/2 stop underexposed can create problems resulting in colorshift, added grain noise etc.. your exposure isnt totaly determined to your aperture. all that aperture is letting you do is have more depth of field the smaller you go (larger f/stop). it's a matter of what you want to show or what you'd like to have sharp in you image. at f/36 if thats the maximum aperture you can achieve on that given lense then it means you're whole frame will be sharp cornre to diagonal corner .


    another factor is , is it a high key or low key scenerio . in the example above that would be considered a low key scenerio. so keying in on your whites wouldnt be th greatest way to get detail out of it, you'll just end up blowing out your highlights if you meter for your whites , you'll also loose detail in the shadow and mid tones.

    if it's for the web i'd go till you just blow your whites over 1/3 of a stop. computer screens will alway be more sharp then a print and thefore having a true white is ideal for view.

    if its for printing you should check with your histogram and make sure you're not blowing out your whites way too much. and check with your lab and comp screen after getting a print to see if its the same on screen as in print. every lab is different.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    30

    Default

    also know you're using a nikon slr i believe, well any dSLR these days are equiped with a reflective light meter on board meaning it only evaluates reflected light. it's not really taking in account for ambient light sources so it all depends on what metering pattern you're set to and what exactly you wanted exposed.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    14

    Default

    Hello h0meGRwN,

    Nice input

    Quote Originally Posted by h0meGRwN View Post
    first off are you using a flash when shooting?

    even beeing a 1/2 stop underexposed can create problems resulting in colorshift, added grain noise etc..
    I haven't seen any problems of color shifting when changing f-stop to underexpose neither have seen added grain.Of course I don't refer to low light conditions where you need to compensate with higher ISO (which always means more noise n grain)or longer shutter speed. But I refer to the case where you can use more light to keep the same ISO and shutter speed, just change the f-stop , or when you have lots of light like when outdoors with sunlight.


    Quote Originally Posted by h0meGRwN View Post
    your exposure isnt totaly determined to your aperture. all that aperture is letting you do is have more depth of field the smaller you go (larger f/stop). it's a matter of what you want to show or what you'd like to have sharp in you image. at f/36 if thats the maximum aperture you can achieve on that given lense then it means you're whole frame will be sharp cornre to diagonal corner .
    You re right but don't forget that most lenses are not very sharp / have lower resolution at their higher f-stops (and most lenses at lower f-stops as well). So even though you may have better depth of field (more things in focus) most of the times you don't get better overall results compared to lower f-stops like f-16 or f-22 instead of f-32 due to blurring/less resolution. For example most lenses have their best resolution at around f-4 - f-8 depending on how 'fast' a lens is of course.And dont forget that in higher than 1:1 magnifications (where we use extensions most of the times:extension tubes / bellows) the 'effective f-stop' is different to what we ve set the lens ('marked f-stop') Also we get better results with medium f-stops not extremes due to diffraction and longer exposure times/higher ISO..


    Quote Originally Posted by h0meGRwN View Post
    another factor is , is it a high key or low key scenerio . in the example above that would be considered a low key scenerio. so keying in on your whites wouldnt be th greatest way to get detail out of it, you'll just end up blowing out your highlights if you meter for your whites , you'll also loose detail in the shadow and mid tones.

    if it's for the web i'd go till you just blow your whites over 1/3 of a stop. computer screens will alway be more sharp then a print and thefore having a true white is ideal for view.

    if its for printing you should check with your histogram and make sure you're not blowing out your whites way too much. and check with your lab and comp screen after getting a print to see if its the same on screen as in print. every lab is different.
    Generally I 'd say if you work with raw format , always underexpose just a bit even if you mean to post the images online only , just to make sure you don't get burned/overblown highlights, cause you can't recover details in overexposed highlight areas, while with shadows its easier to recover the details in the dark areas as most DSLR cams have better high dynamic range compared to most films/slide film.The best thing to do is avoid extreme contrast in your scene so you dont have problems with exposure and lost detail.A way to do this is to use 'reflector cards' photographers use and/or 'light diffusers' .


    By the way I was wondering has anyone of you tried to make any HDR format images and tonemap them afterwards to make the image into a LowDynamicRange one (so its more pleasing and natural looking to the eye) ? I ve done a few and have seen another ICmag member has done it as well.Its good approach but I prefer to just make sure I have good lighting from the start to get a good pic straight from the cam. Or at least minimize the post editing and correction process time.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    30

    Default

    i agree raw format is the way to go, its true it dependent on your lens quality and speed, you can recover some information on an over exposed picture but don't look at grabbign to much , it'll start to fall apart after 1stop of correction in my opinion. reflector cards are handy and will help determine a proper exposure when using 18% grey card (all dSLR cameras are calibrated to 18%grey) using a white card to balance is key when shooting dSLR.

    as far HDR no i havent switched over to that, i just optimize my files as is and that's that.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    20

    Default

    Id go with f36 as well....i dont know shit about photography but that one looks like its got more depth and colour than the others...

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    high up in a cheese hut
    Posts
    219

    Default

    well cool some responses
    thanks
    1 these pictures are mostly for this site and as a record for myself.

    2 im using a nikon d100 with 60mm nikkor 2.8 macro
    the flash is an sb 29 ring flash and i use a sb 800 in a soft box.
    the metering is matrix and i almost always shoot in aperture priority.

    and shooting in jpeg and the only post shot alteration is file shrinking from 3000 x 2000 to 750 x 1000 soo pics upload to sites.

Similar Threads

  1. Family shot
    By tomatee in forum Head Pieces
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 07-17-2010, 04:58 PM
  2. toroMilk family shot
    By toroMilk in forum Head Pieces
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 01-25-2010, 07:35 PM
  3. First ever milk shot!
    By DaNK in forum Head Pieces
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 05-13-2009, 05:55 PM
  4. My Best Macro Shot!
    By subcool in forum Pictures
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 05-18-2008, 05:49 AM
  5. test
    By fullmeltbubble in forum Techniques
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-25-2007, 07:20 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •