Calling all Photography nerds!

What is this "three shots bracketed and then merged in Photoshop" mean? I kind of understand it but if you know of a youtube video showing a how-to that would be cool. I'm pretty green when it comes to photography and even more when it comes to Photoshop.

 

This is a pretty decent explanation of exposure bracketing:



Bracketing is taking multiple frames of the same shot at different exposures. In the railroad shot one is exposed optimal for the highlights--brightest areas of the image, one is is exposed for the darkest areas and one is exposed for the mid range tones. You can preset the exposures and when the shutter is actuated the camera just fires off the frames. Of course the use of a tripod is pretty much a necessity.

Merging them in Photoshop is taking all the frames; in this instance 3, and overlaying them and merging them together to more or less combine all of the exposures into one shot.

In a scene like the one of the railroad tracks the dynamic range is so extreme that the camera simply is unable to capture it all. The frame exposed correctly for the highlights left the mid range and darker areas way underexposed. The frames exposed for the dark areas and mid range areas vastly over exposed the highlights; the awesome colors and sun. By capturing all of the tonal ranges separately and then merging them, it allows you to create one image that contains most of the full dynamic range.

You can also get a sort of high dynamic range photo by using off camera flash. In this shot, I metered off of the sky and twiddled with it to get the sun where I wanted it, but the model was quite under exposed and basically a silhouette. I put a flash on her to bring her up so that I could have both the sun and the subject exposed close to what I intended.

 

Sweet! Thanks for the write up. I'll have to watch that video tomorrow.

 

I think this was shot on my 50mm 1.4 at 2.0. I have a polarizer on there all the time so that was most likely on at the time I shot this. Just happened to snap it off right as the weld popped.

EDIT:

exif data for welding shot, 50mm 1.4 with polarizer at f1.8, iso500, 1/200th shutter.

Heres the RAW

 

Thanks man, love your shots too!

That’s a shovel on the rack you are seeing

 

More pics from a recent trip to the Oregon coast.

 

Ahhh! I see it. I was like, now thats a snorkel I wouldn't mind having. Damn you and these beach pics!

 

I love messing with light painting. This is from a 70D with a 24mm f/2.8 IS USM lens
ISO-200
f/13
20" exposure

Lit with a running headlamp.

 

My Tacoma was sitting at the airport in California when I was chasing this steam locomotive in Minnesota last September.

 

I love the D810, the dynamic range is CRAZY but I went from a D700 so it was a nice leap forward, I have never used the D750 but I love that it has a flip out screen and wifi. If your not printing large scale and shoot raw its unlikely you will really notice the difference in the 2.

Plus if you buy the D750 you can use all that money you saved to buy a nice lens for it. My uncle blew all his savings on a D850 ( no idea why) and now is to broke to buy a FX lens so he's rocking a $3300 camera and a shit DX kit lens, so he gets really big soft focus photos, its so comical.

 

For a good comparison between the D750 and the D810, this is helpful. They are really quite close, and both are known as dynamic range beasts. It's a matter of if you feel that the difference between the two is worth the price difference. The D750 body, brand new, is about $1800 while the D810 is about $2800.

You'd have to print some seriously huge prints to be able to tell a difference without pixel peeping; I'm talking up to 30x40 inches up to ISO 400. If you took the same identical pic with each camera, you'll be hard pressed with seeing a difference on a 30x40 print. But, say, at ISO 800, the D810 will definitely have better detail on a 30x40 print. Plus the D810 doesn't have an AA filter which means at a pixel peeping level, it's going to have a bit more detail. But again, unless you're printing out huge prints, you'd be hard pressed to see a difference.

I have a D750, and if I shoot RAW and ETTR, the dynamic range is astounding. And as far as sharpness, I've never had a problem. But sharpness has mostly to do with lens quality and shooting technique.

 

I phone snapshot!

 

Do any of you on here fly drones? Ive been getting really into it lately for capturing video and stills.

 

https://www.tacomaworld.com/threads/quadcopters-anyone.297934/page-155#post-16966792

 

I need to get back into shooting some stills... I'm close to pulling the trigger on a new camera body.

I have an Olympus OM-D EM5, which is a really good camera. It takes REALLY good stills, especially with the awesome 12-40mm f/2.8 lens... but the camera is dated. It can only shoot video in 720p, and it's not that great. I want a great still shooter that can also shoot at least "pretty good" video, in at least 1080p.

Since I already have a few lenses, and I really like the micro 4/3 platform, especially the Olympus platform (the 5 axis stabilization is phenomenal, and the jpeg engine is pretty damn awesome), I'm going to pick up an EM-5 Mark II.


BTW, here's a cool shot I got of my truck... not a drone... from my paramotor!

https://youtu.be/1B6COfmHb0Q

 

Photo nerd

 

Nikon L340

 

Latest pics from today