Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Taken with Nikon D50 with Sigma 105 macro lens at f/14, 1/250 sec. with on camera flash.

nice and sharp, Depth of field is good. It is almost two stops underexposed, and I would like to see more of the body, even if it were out of focus - perhaps just enough to know why it is a red-backed salamander
-----
Erik Williams

fattailed geckos, western hognoses, and a bunch of postage stamps.
Contact me
www.chicagoherp.org
Chicago Herpetological Society

Here is the original, uncropped version (I thought that spot of glare was distracting). This is with a little more exposure.

-Zach

-----
AIM sn: z10silver

Zach,

You are right, the glare is distracting. I think the crop is an improvement in composition - you can still follow the rule of thirds and get the body in the frame by making the salamander 2/3 and the background 1/3, which is opposite of how you shot this. It is still underexposed, and now could stand a bit more contrast (use the curves function). It could benefit from a bit more saturation in the reds as well.

It's a tough shot to post process, I would suggest a reshoot - salamander season still has a few weeks left in most places!
-----
Erik Williams

fattailed geckos, western hognoses, and a bunch of postage stamps.
Contact me
www.chicagoherp.org
Chicago Herpetological Society

Thanks for the comments Erik. Just wondering if you could give me any tips on how to judge when the exposure is just right? Also, I don't really know anything about using the "curves" function. If it adjusts contrast, how is this different than adjusting contrast regularly? (I use Adobe Bridge to edit RAW images)

Thanks
Zach

Zach:

Exposure is a tough thing to explain - on a calibrated monitor, it just looks right. a well exposed shot looks like you can reach out and touch it.

I can tell your shot is underexposed at a glance, but the litmus test is the histogram. The histogram reveals that most of the information is left of center, which is the dark half of the graph. On some shots, like a fog shot, that might be fine - but for a detailed macro or close-up, most of the time a broader distribution of information is desirable.

Exposure meters vary depending on the camera. Most are visible through the viewfinder (except in pre-meter film cameras, or cameras without manual modes) and read from -3 to 3 (or so). Mine reads from -2 to 2. setting the exposure so that the meter reads 0 will usually result in a well exposed photo, but not always. Underexposed photos will read negative, and overexposed will read positive - usually.

Knowing how to meter is an important skill, and the only way to see how well the camera is doing is by taking lots of photos. Once the exposure is set, take a test photo and check the histogram - watch for clipped highlights (information smushed up against the right side) or clipped shadows (information squashed to the left). If your camera has a live histogram, use it - it's great. I barely use the meter anymore, now that I have live histogram.

I aim to have the information distributed properly - to the left in a darker overall scene, centered in a balanced scene, or to the right in a bright scene. Any information that clips left, right, or top might induce me to change the exposure a bit to see what happens. As long as there is not much clipping, the location of the graph within the histogram is a matter of personal preference.

The curves tool works just like the histogram. The graph has a line drawn from bottom left to top right. This line represents the tones in the photo, from black to white. Adjusting the curve of the graph will adjust how much of a particular tone is in the shot - lower the left side a bit and the shadows will be darker. Raise the right side a bit, the highlights will get brighter. Raising the middle can increase the overall brightness of a shot. Adjusting contrast with curves is a much more powerful method than using the contrast slider - it allows you to set where exactly the contrast is needed, and where it isn't. again, play with it a bit to see how it works. A good contrast curve might look like an S and will effect only one or two tones - input 64 output 58, and input 190 output 191, for instance. That curve will darken the shadows substantially but only lighten the highlights a tiny bit. The middle tones will drop a bit too, making the shot overall a bit darker.

good luck with it, and remember to ALWAYS edit photos in layers - new adjustment layer, new layer, or duplicate layer. That way, you can turn changes on and off, edit without destroying information, and draw layer masks and adjust opacity of effects. It all sounds complicated, but once you get to know your way around it will take seconds for most photos to go from camera to internet.
-----
Erik Williams

fattailed geckos, western hognoses, and a bunch of postage stamps.
Contact me
www.chicagoherp.org
Chicago Herpetological Society

Thanks for the info Erik -

I am fine with using the light meter when taking shots in natural light. What I have trouble with is gauging what the will be exposure when using a flash. Is there any way to get the light meter to take flash into account, or is this something I just will figure out how to compensate for over time?

-Zach

I like the composition of the head, but not its position in the frame. There is too much moss on the right side.

I'm not sure I agree with Erik about it being a two stops under, but it could it would be interesting to lighten it up a little and see the outcome. Bringing up the shadows, particularly might help.

My concern was the black mark on the right side. Is that something on your sensor? It looks too sharply focused for that, but I can't figure out where else it might be? You might get a blower bulb (not canned air!) and gently blow the dust off your sensor using your camera's sensor cleaning mode.

One good way to look for sensor dust is to shoot a photo of a clean white background (paper works well) that is out of focus at the max f/stop for your lens. If there is junk on your sensor, it will show up as spots on the image.
-----
Chris Harrison
San Antonio, Texas

Hmm, hadn't even noticed that. I'll take a few shots of paper and see what turns up. What is a blower bulb? Is it much more effective than simply trying to blow the dust out myself? As for the composition, I was under the impression that some space should be left in the direction that the animal is facing/looking toward?

-Zach
-----
AIM sn: z10silver

>>As for the composition, I was under the impression that some space should be left in the direction that the animal is facing/looking toward?
>>

here's a shot that I think works as an example. This shot defies the "space to move" theory, the large depth of field theory, and interprets the rule of thirds in a half-full rather than half-empty way. It even has areas of blown highlights, but I don't think they distract - I think they help the salamander look slimy and shiny! The critter doesn't always need a football field in front of it, it just has to make sense that the critter could move if it wanted to. Although I chose to make this a close portrait, this shot would work at less zoom as well. does this make my points clearer?

-----
Erik Williams

fattailed geckos, western hognoses, and a bunch of postage stamps.
Contact me
www.chicagoherp.org
Chicago Herpetological Society

That's a cool shot - I understand what you're saying about composition. I also completely agree with you about preserving the wet appearance of the skin even if it does create a few reflections. However, in my opinion the color of this photo doesn't look natural. Seems like too much red/yellow saturation maybe a bit over exposed for my taste.

-Zach

Hey man,

sorry, old photo - My diffuser does indeed create a strong warm color cast, and I usually just correct the cast in photoshop. Looks like I forgot to do that in this one, I just slapped it up because it fit the discription. I updated the link accordingly, to a more natural looking pic.

The exposure is dead on though - if it looks overexposed to you, you might need to calibrate your monitor. Brightness, contrast and gamma all effect the way images are displayed, and one of those being "off" might make a shot look a whole lot different than it is. you can tell the exposure is good from the histogram. That may also explain why your photo is underexposed - it might look right on your screen, despite being under!

Here is the histogram from that photo. The tones range more or less evenly from left to right, with only a tiny bit of clipping on the highlight side (those blown highlights on his side). A histogram like this is perfectly exposed for a shot where middle gray is exposed to middle gray. That might not always be the goal - sometimes a little under or over is a good thing, but in this shot there is an even range of tones and middle gray looks good as middle gray.

-----
Erik Williams

fattailed geckos, western hognoses, and a bunch of postage stamps.
Contact me
www.chicagoherp.org
Chicago Herpetological Society

I'll have to ask my parents about if they calibrated this computer or not - I have been keeping the monitor display on the brightest setting but nto sure if thath would cause any problems. On my D50 the histogram display seems to be "reversed" from the example you have shown (highlights on the right, shadows on the left)?

What is a blower bulb? Is it much more effective than simply trying to blow the dust out myself?

Yes. You shouldn't ever try to blow that stuff off with your mouth (assuming that's what you are implying). Your saliva and other crud from your mouth would get on your sensor and the moisture from your breath could condense on your sensor if the sensor is cold. That could be disasterous.

Here's a pic of a "Rocket Blower" bulb I took off the B&H photo website. Anybody who owns a DSLR should own one of these.

You should be able to find a similar device at any local camera store. I think best buy even carries something similar. But you should never use any canned air to clean a sensor (or a lens).

As for the composition, I was under the impression that some space should be left in the direction that the animal is facing/looking toward?

Yes, but only enough to give the animal somewhere to focus. We generally don't want our audience to wonder "what's the critter looking at?".

Erik's cave salamander photo works, because even though there isn't room in front of the animal, it is clear the animal is looking forward at us.
-----
Chris Harrison
San Antonio, Texas