[clackers]

Remember, Lushdimple, the camera meters as if the subject is 18 percent grey.

You need to take charge with the exposure compensation dial if you like semi-automation, or do it all in Manual.

I see nothing wrong with the captures themselves - preserving the highlights means the clouds are nice.

You need during editing to bring up the water, subject and foreground as Savoche has done.

As they stand, they're all underexposed.

[mattt]

"Scene mode" = Surf & Snow (Pg 93 in the manual)

[lushdimple11]

Yep....bright sunshine, reflective sand, reflective water....always at risk of the camera underexposing.

The third one is fine

Can you please elaborate on the risk? And how to mitigate that risk? I'm interested in this because I'm going to the beach a lot. Thanks!

[pschlute]

Can you please elaborate on the risk? And how to mitigate that risk? I'm interested in this because I'm going to the beach a lot. Thanks!

As others have already pointed out, if you photograph a mainly very bright scene your camera tries to balance the light for 18% grey and you will get a darker than intended picture. You can take control by anticipating this and use exposure compensation to brighten the picture. Or you can bracket your shots for example 0/+0.50/+1.0. Or you can use the manual settings to overexpose the scene. Whichever method you choose you should review you pictures after you take them both on the screen and by looking at the histogram.

One final thing to note is that there are some scenes which are at the very limits of what our cameras are capable of recording correctly. This is the dynamic range dilemma. As others pointed out your clouds look great, they retain detail. If you expose so that your subject is brighter...those clouds will be blown out and show no detail...that makes for an ugly photo. The best way to deal with this is to shoot RAW and learn how to use a good editing software program. You will then be able to lift the lighting in the dark areas without blowing the highlights.

[pschlute]

You can achieve something like this

[lushdimple11]

Most of the times I shoot a lot like you did here. Better have normally exposed skies rather than overexposed skies. And here comes the moment we all love Pentax for: bringing up the shadows with no loss. Here is and absolutely dark RAW image (except for the perfectly exposed sky) after PP.

A gorgeous picture! Yeah, some of my (underexposed) pics could be saved after PP. If only I could intentionally capture those pics that way, I wouldn't have been seeking your advice by now.

---------- Post added 08-22-17 at 04:47 AM ----------

Full daylight is tough to meter with reflected light. Often a good method when there is clear patch of blue sky--is to spot meter that.

---------- Post added 08-21-17 at 05:08 PM ----------


If the scene is balanced with roughly 50% bright and 50% dark (or large areas of a midtone)--the meter gets the correct exposure. But when it is mostly bright, the meter will underexpose. Ditto if the scene is mostly dark, the meter will overexpose. As I said reflected light reading is tough for the camera to "guess" what the scene is. Matrix metering may help--but the best is that you learn a bit about exposure (old school stuff).

Speaking of learning a bit about exposure and after some self-learning, I wish there are more guidances that point out the connections between all elements that affect exposure (aperture, shutter speed & ISO) with metering modes. I learned about these separately and I failed to see the connection earlier.

---------- Post added 08-22-17 at 04:50 AM ----------

It does not show in the exif but I wonder if exposure compensation was inadvertently set to -1 or so.

As far as I remember my checking, it wasn't!

[mcgregni]

It may simply not be possible to record the general brightness you want at the time of capture ....this is the Dynamic Range limitation that Peter wrote about earlier. If you had cranked up your exposure compensation, or set a higher exposure value with manual manual mode, say by +0.7 as is probably needed, then you face that "risk" of the whites in the clouds "blowing out " and looking ugly. As others have been saying, it is better to capture the image as you have and raise the midtones and shadows a bit in processing, than to try and "rescue" blown highlights.

High quality image production from a DSLR is the combination of calculated capture techniques with a view to the processing needs later for the final optimisation of the end product. The best quality cannot be achieved by an either / or approach.

[35mmfilmfan]

Speaking of learning a bit about exposure and after some self-learning, I wish there are more guidance that points out the connections between all elements that affect exposure (aperture, shutter speed & ISO) with metering modes. I learned about these separately and I failed to see the connection earlier.

If you search for the Exposure Triangle, this may give you some help. If you need a QD method, meter from the back of your hand, then close down a stop (i.e. if the meter says f8, go to f11). Not always easy - I still struggle on occasions after 50-odd years !

[lushdimple11]

OP - I was like you scratching my head what the heck did I do wrong? Saw some youtube tutorials and learned, in that situation Spot meter + moving focus point to where you want, might give you better result. For instance on the second picture you could have kept the focus on the beautiful lady with spot meter to get a better shot. I haven't tried it yet.

But like others suggested capture in RAW or need to play with Exposure compensation, may be use built-in surf and snow scene mode?

Hahaha, that lady was me! Thank you! Well noted about the spot metering mode, I'll experiment it during my next time to the beach!

[lushdimple11]

It may simply not be possible to record the general brightness you want at the time of capture ....this is the Dynamic Range limitation that Peter wrote about earlier. If you had cranked up your exposure compensation, or set a higher exposure value with manual manual mode, say by +0.7 as is probably needed, then you face that "risk" of the whites in the clouds "blowing out " and looking ugly. As others have been saying, it is better to capture the image as you have and raise the midtones and shadows a bit in processing, than to try and "rescue" blown highlights.

High quality image production from a DSLR is the combination of calculated capture techniques with a view to the processing needs later for the final optimisation of the end product. The best quality cannot be achieved by an either / or approach.

For pics that are much underexposed (to my liking) like these, the only way is to bring up the details using PP as per your suggestions. After reading all your advice, I think I need to stop beating myself up and start reviewing these pics with an open mind.

[lushdimple11]

Remember, Lushdimple, the camera meters as if the subject is 18 percent grey.

You need to take charge with the exposure compensation dial if you like semi-automation, or do it all in Manual.

I see nothing wrong with the captures themselves - preserving the highlights means the clouds are nice.

You need during editing to bring up the water, subject and foreground as Savoche has done.

As they stand, they're all underexposed.

I should have said my expected end result looks like this. Same metering mode but for some reason, the brightness is just right (for me), as opposed to the underexposed ones I posted at the beginning. I did some PP but just a little bit. I'm taking note of all your valuable advice and will try again during my next trip. Hopefully, I can calculate the outcomes more precisely. Many thanks for all your kind and quick supports!

[clackers]

I should have said my expected end result looks like this. Same metering mode but for some reason, the brightness is just right (for me), as opposed to the underexposed ones I posted at the beginning. I did some PP but just a little bit. I'm taking note of all your valuable advice and will try again during my next trip. Hopefully, I can calculate the outcomes more precisely. Many thanks for all your kind and quick supports!

It's still underexposed to me, Lushdimple, this was obviously a bright day during a fantastic holiday but the picture doesn't reflect that, IMHO.

Your final pic after postprocessing should have genuine white bits and genuine black bits, not shades of grey.

But if you PP your pics to your tastes rather than editorial standards, that's fine. No one's paying you for these, they document a happy time in your life.

[stevebrot]

I would not advise using spot metering for this sort of image. The Matrix Pattern metering is ideal,

What he said ^ ^ ^

Technically, the photos are well-exposed. Specular white highlights are properly placed as are true white elements (hull of ship in #2). Matrix metering would have pushed the boundary a little further and a RAW capture would have been totally salvageable. When I am at the beach or in the mountains where sunlit snow is part of the mix, my fall-back is to go old school and expose for the actual light level (so-called incident light) rather than what is reflected back from the subject. This may be done one of two ways, one cheap and the other not-so-cheap...

• Using a hand-held meter capable of incident readings ($$) --or--
• Metering off an 18% gray card oriented to the light source rather than the scene itself ($). A proper reading from the gray card will have a balanced and centered histogram.

One uses M-mode for both and the settings from either will work fine until either the light or the subject changes. Yes, all of the beach photos could have been done with the same settings. I carry both a meter and the card in my bag.


Steve

[stevebrot]

Well noted about the spot metering mode

Spot metering requires knowledge of where you want to take meter from and the process generally is done in M-mode or using AE Lock. I have participated in multiple troubleshooting/"my camera is broken" threads in the last few months that were due directly to inappropriate spot metering. As noted above, the meter is hoping to center the histogram and will meter to 18% gray. Using your photo #1 as an example...

• Point the meter spot at the sand and you will get a results similar to what you have
• Meter off the dark hill at middle left and the breaking wavelets and much of the clouds will probably be totally blown out white
• Meter off the center of frame and a few degrees up or down may result in mild under or over exposure, depending on where the spot lands

The process of sampling reflected light from an element in the frame as the basis for exposure allows one to "place exposure" for that element with the risk that other things may not look that great. In short, spot metering is an advanced technique, but one that can be very useful for some subjects. I won't say much more than to point out that so far in 2017, I have taken part in at least 10 troubleshooting threads with titles such as "Inconsistent exposure with Kxxx". Almost as many have involved having the camera set with exposure to follow the AF point (only available for multi-segment metering on your K-r). This is seldom a good idea, even though it seems like a no-brainer. The only time it might make sense is if the photographer knows what is going to be at the focus point and knows how they want it exposed.


Steve

[pschlute]

One other thing to note is that the setting of the brightness on the OP's monitor (and indeed all of our monitors) will affect how the picture appears. When the under/over exposure is marginal, this could be significant.