Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-18-2011, 02:00 PM   #46
Senior Member




Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: La Jolla, CA.
Posts: 262
This illustration will show your blown highlights and histogram data to the left. The sky is overexposed and of course, the white balance is off.

Next time try shooting the scene in manual mode with spot metering so that the camera isn't making calculations for your scene.



12-18-2011, 02:06 PM   #47
Veteran Member
jolepp's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Finland
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,196
I would *think* you'd only need the license string: I installed mine using a bit later version downloaded from Adobe ftp server, and gave that the string/key from the package (bought from the local web store though) to stop it from nagging about the 30 day trial period.
12-18-2011, 02:14 PM   #48
Veteran Member
joe.penn's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Maryland (Right Outside Washington DC)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,902
QuoteOriginally posted by IIGQ4U Quote
Next time try shooting the scene in manual mode with spot metering so that the camera isn't making calculations for your scene
There's more to it than just that. Flipping the camera in "Hyper-Manual Mode" and using Spot Metering, you will still need to meter off of the bright(s) - meaning the following:

Camera In "M" Mode:
- Set for Spot Metering
- Center Frame the bright(s) of the scene
- Green Button meter
- Recompose and shoot

Camera In "A/V" Mode:
- Set for Spot Metering
- Center Frame the bright(s) of the scene
- Press "AE/Lock" to lock the exposure
- Recompose and shoot

You can see above that you can also do the same thing in "A/V" mode.

With the dynamic range of the latest bodies, you can miss metering a little and still yield great results with a little PP...
12-18-2011, 02:17 PM   #49
Senior Member




Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: La Jolla, CA.
Posts: 262
Obviously, pardon me for assuming the OP is familiar with spot metering.


Last edited by IIGQ4U; 12-18-2011 at 02:22 PM.
12-18-2011, 02:21 PM   #50
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,868
It took about 15 seconds in Aperture to find the reds in this photo, I'm assuming it would be about the same in Lightroom. I could have made them darker, but this looked good to me. Great image by the way.

Voila

12-18-2011, 03:06 PM   #51
New Member




Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 17
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by IIGQ4U Quote
This illustration will show your blown highlights and histogram data to the left. The sky is overexposed and of course, the white balance is off.

Next time try shooting the scene in manual mode with spot metering so that the camera isn't making calculations for your scene.
QuoteOriginally posted by joe.penn Quote
There's more to it than just that. Flipping the camera in "Hyper-Manual Mode" and using Spot Metering, you will still need to meter off of the bright(s) - meaning the following:

Camera In "M" Mode:
- Set for Spot Metering
- Center Frame the bright(s) of the scene
- Green Button meter
- Recompose and shoot

Camera In "A/V" Mode:
- Set for Spot Metering
- Center Frame the bright(s) of the scene
- Press "AE/Lock" to lock the exposure
- Recompose and shoot

You can see above that you can also do the same thing in "A/V" mode.

With the dynamic range of the latest bodies, you can miss metering a little and still yield great results with a little PP...
Thanks guys
As it was my first real use of my K5, I did a lot of experiences using several settings. But one must be alert to the little details all the time. At about the 3rd day of my trip I started to be (much) more skilled w/ all the camera settings and think about all the adjustments much faster (my old Elan II didnīt have a hundredth of the K5īs possible settings!) , but obviously I went wrong at this time, forgetting to change spot metering. Maybe because, just after I took the photo, I became so disapointed w/ the HUGE difference between what I was seeing and what the camera had registered, that I could only think about a WB issue, so that on the second example (at the same place and time), you can see my frustated (terrific!) attempt to "manual" adjust the WB in order to get the reds I was seeing.
12-18-2011, 03:10 PM   #52
New Member




Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 17
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
It took about 15 seconds in Aperture to find the reds in this photo, I'm assuming it would be about the same in Lightroom. I could have made them darker, but this looked good to me. Great image by the way.

Voila
Great job Normhead!
Your 15 sec work gave back what I was seeing at the moment I took the picture! I must learn these things quickly! What did you change? Exposure, WB, both, anything else?
Thanks a lot!
12-18-2011, 03:51 PM - 1 Like   #53
Junior Member




Join Date: Jan 2011
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 27
Each of your photos is overexposed. The two with the white skies are correctly exposed for the rest of the scene, meaning the sky has blown out and clipped white. This will happen pretty much every time you photograph a cloudy sky during the day. Only ways to avoid it are to use a graduated ND filter, to deliberately underexpose the rest of your scene, or to bracket your shots and then combine them in post (advanced technique!). Or, you can just wait another hour for it to get a bit darker

The one with the orange sign is just generally a couple of stops overexposed.

If you shot in RAW, try making use of the recovery slider in Lightroom.

12-18-2011, 04:37 PM   #54
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sydney
Posts: 671
With K5 is generally better to underexpose than to overexpose like you did. The raw files don't have much detail in highlights and they get blown. If the rest of the scene was underexposed and you had metered for the sky, you still could have recovered the buildings from shadows.

But yes, the sky is blown, so there's not a lot of detail there. To upload raw file go to http://Dropbox.com and post a link here in the forum.


http://jarek.smugmug.com
12-18-2011, 04:51 PM   #55
Site Supporter
jatrax's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,772
QuoteOriginally posted by Rogertmac Quote
Does Lightroom (or Picasa 3) have an option that automatically separates the jpegs from the raw photos in any given folder?
Not that I know of, but I am definitely not an expert. The deeper you dig into this program the more things you find it can do.
QuoteOriginally posted by Rogertmac Quote
Another doubt: when one makes any modification or delete a photo using Lightroom (or Picasa),it will be modified or deleted at the original folder, or it will be preserved "at the origin" and be altered/deleted only at the "catalog" created by the program?
Lightroom is a "non-destructive" editor. That means the edit changes are only recorded in the catalog, sort of as a list of changes to be made, you can view the history of changes and see what was done. But nothing is ever done to the original file. The changes are 'applied' upon export to jpeg or tif, so your RAW files are not touched. Think of it as having the film negatives, you can print them as many times as you want, and if you had access to a lab and enlarger could print them completely differently each time. But the negative stays untouched.

I only have RAW files in my Lightroom catalog, no reason you could not have the jpegs but that is the way I started. I consider the RAWs to be negatives and when I need a print, jpeg, or something for a stock website, I export it at that time with the settings I need for that job. The RAW stays untouched, except that keywords and title are written out to the RAWs.
QuoteQuote:
I was just checking the BH and Amazonīs sites and found (in shock!) that the program costs US$ 190 there in USA!!! Here in my 5th World Country, Adobe charges Almost US$600 for it!!!!
I had no idea Lightroom was so expensive there. I would have to think really hard before spending $600. But if you can get it for $199 I think it is worth it.
QuoteQuote:
One thing I already know: I really need to decide which program to start with.
I agree, that is why I made such a point. The learning curve and time invested with the software far exceeds the time spent learning the camera. And most of us would rather be taking pictures than learning software. So pick what works for you, learn it and stick with it.
12-18-2011, 05:06 PM   #56
Site Supporter
BigDave's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Hudson Valley, NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,628
also, if you are shooting in other than raw, set the wb to shade. This does the best job for removing color casts of blue, and thereby accentuates the reds and yellows ( remember, with filters, to remove the blue cast you would use a yellow filter).

to bump the reds in the sky I also use a sepia or orange graduated filter.

regards,
12-18-2011, 05:18 PM   #57
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,868
OK I exaggerated. The reason I could get that done in 15 seconds was I have preset I use for fall colours that also works well on sunsets that don't have a lot of green in them. So contrast, some sharpening, some saturation, some definition. But what made the big difference was burning the sky about a stop. I've used that preset, one I created myself on lots of sunsets and fall colours, so I'm really aware of what it does and recognize where I should use it. Then when it didn't do exactly what I wanted I knew I had to burn the sky to achieve what I wanted. So 15 seconds, but a 15 seconds that required a lot of knowledge of how my software works. The taking time to learn what your software can do and learning how to maximize your results is just as important as acquiring the software.
12-18-2011, 08:28 PM   #58
New Member




Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 17
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by allio Quote
Each of your photos is overexposed. The two with the white skies are correctly exposed for the rest of the scene, meaning the sky has blown out and clipped white. This will happen pretty much every time you photograph a cloudy sky during the day. Only ways to avoid it are to use a graduated ND filter, to deliberately underexpose the rest of your scene, or to bracket your shots and then combine them in post (advanced technique!). Or, you can just wait another hour for it to get a bit darker

The one with the orange sign is just generally a couple of stops overexposed.

If you shot in RAW, try making use of the recovery slider in Lightroom.
In fact I do have a Cokin graduated ND filter... Just need to buy a 52mm adaptor to use it w/ my new Pentax lenses. Didnīt have it w/ me at the trip. Besides, w/ so many things to learn about the new K5 and so many things to remember about photography (almost 10 years away from this world) I donīt think I would remember to use at that moment, even if I had it w/ me inside my new (and pretty damn good!!!) Lowepro Vertex bag...

QuoteOriginally posted by Nuff Quote
With K5 is generally better to underexpose than to overexpose like you did. The raw files don't have much detail in highlights and they get blown. If the rest of the scene was underexposed and you had metered for the sky, you still could have recovered the buildings from shadows.

But yes, the sky is blown, so there's not a lot of detail there. To upload raw file go to Dropbox - Simplify your life and post a link here in the forum.


Jarek Miszkinis' Photography | SmugMug
I already read this tip (better underexpose w/ K5) somewhere, but, as I told before, so many things to learn and remember at the same time. But the next time w/ sunsets, I will try no to forget it! I hope I can still recover any detail w/ an editor from that raw file...
Thank you for the hint about the dropbox (someone has mentioned it a couple of posts ago, but I was afraid to ask to what did it mean. Too much silly doubts for oneīs first posts...


QuoteOriginally posted by BigDave Quote
also, if you are shooting in other than raw, set the wb to shade. This does the best job for removing color casts of blue, and thereby accentuates the reds and yellows ( remember, with filters, to remove the blue cast you would use a yellow filter).

to bump the reds in the sky I also use a sepia or orange graduated filter.

regards,
Yes! I do have an orange graduated filter from Cokin too! Iīll put everything in my bag the next trip!
BTW, how about a Minolta meter? I have one too. Almost like new! (Bought it less than an year before stop shooting). Is it worth to use such a thing nowadays w/ such powerfull cameras? (No, I didnīt have it w/ me at my trip too...).

Thanks!
12-18-2011, 11:14 PM   #59
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sydney
Posts: 671
I would say, before you add any meters or filters. Learn how to use the camera, learn it's quirks and get comfortable with it and photography. Next step would be to get a software package to develop RAW files. Do 1 step at a time and don't get overwhelmed with everything. Like it has been mentioned, most software packages come with 30 day evaluation copy. Download 1 at a time, experiment with it for 30 days and see if you like it.

I've chose Lightroom since it was the most intuitive to me, it had the features that I wanted and there's large support group. My Dad who's 67 picked up and learned lightroom in minutes. All I had to do was show him more advance features.
12-19-2011, 08:45 PM   #60
Site Supporter
SpecialK's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: So California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,912
QuoteOriginally posted by Rogertmac Quote
Why almost nobody here mentions the Pentax Utilities 4 for editing, is it too bad?
The Pentax software has a pretty well-deserved reputation as being buggy, user-unfriendly, and having a bad interface. Some people like the newer (4.30+ version).

I used the early version for 18 months, and still do for file handling duties. For converting raw files, I went to Elements 6 (and now 9) some time ago for the ease of use, and some tools (easier horizon-leveling tool, spot-healing brush) that were missing in the Pentax package.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, colors, doubts, k5, lot, modes, pentax help, photos, time, times
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
MFT blog for the impossible nickthetasmaniac Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 35 06-25-2011 01:56 AM
Is it impossible to get shots like this (link given) with a K5 without stitching? crossover37 Pentax K-5 20 05-28-2011 02:46 AM
Searching by the word - IMPOSSIBLE! vanakaru Site Suggestions and Help 2 05-07-2011 02:50 PM
Nature It's impossible to shoot birds under without a 600mm L lens and Canon AF jaieger Post Your Photos! 6 12-01-2010 06:56 PM
Car Shoot in Red Rocks Colorado ccranfie78 Post Your Photos! 5 10-29-2007 09:11 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:08 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top