In my recent Flora entry, Primavera, I tried a technique that I read about on DPC forums. I think it was Bod that started the thread, but I can't find it anymore.
I used very high shutter speed plus the flash to get a black background in bright light setting. Although the light was no so bright, I used 1/10, 000 of a second at F11, and the built in flash a normal intensity. I also used the macro setting on the lens.
I received MANY comments saying that the lighting was too harsh. Here is an altered take on the same pic, plus a little something extra in the border. Any comment would be great!
While I've seen this technique done using flash, on a recent course I went on, I learned that the more common way to do this is with a well lit subject and a background that is in the shade - then it is just a case of exposing correctly for the subject and the background will go dark.
This is apparently harder to achieve with digital though, with a wider dynamic range than film (I've seen estimates of 5 stops vs 3 stops for film)
This is apparently harder to achieve with digital though, with a wider dynamic range than film (I've seen estimates of 5 stops vs 3 stops for film)
I usually see the estimates the other way around. Normal digitals around 3 stops, normal film around 5 (good film=more). That's why Fuji developed the new SR sensor, they want to equal film with that one.
...I learned that the more common way to do this is with a well lit subject and a background that is in the shade - then it is just a case of exposing correctly for the subject and the background will go dark....
That's how this one happened. Actually pleasantly surprised with the result, but it caught me off guard. I hadn't realized that the background was THAT much darker than the dandelion -- my eyes certainly didn't see it that way.
More complicated than that -- overall digital has more dynamic range, but film/slidefilms have more dynamic range in the highlights.
Explaination
Originally posted by Azrifel:
Originally posted by Gordon:
This is apparently harder to achieve with digital though, with a wider dynamic range than film (I've seen estimates of 5 stops vs 3 stops for film)
I usually see the estimates the other way around. Normal digitals around 3 stops, normal film around 5 (good film=more). That's why Fuji developed the new SR sensor, they want to equal film with that one
That's because the human eyes can see a lot more stops than film can (Something to the order of a normal working range of 30,000:1 light to dark ratio!). Our eyes also adjust automatically between light and dark, so when we see colors in the dark, it still appears to be the right color. Take a photograph of it and it'll look "unnatural" or it'll be too dark.
Originally posted by Patella:
Originally posted by Gordon:
...I learned that the more common way to do this is with a well lit subject and a background that is in the shade - then it is just a case of exposing correctly for the subject and the background will go dark....
That's how this one happened. Actually pleasantly surprised with the result, but it caught me off guard. I hadn't realized that the background was THAT much darker than the dandelion -- my eyes certainly didn't see it that way.
