# Can't keep sky from blowing out...



## 512_SIR II (Jan 25, 2011)

I took this shot yesterday while I was a local spot here in Austin (360 bridge). For some reason I couldn't keep the sky from blowing out. I took the shot around 4:30pm so the sun was still pretty harsh and was at about my 2 o clock position. I had the camera set to Av mode and the settings were as follows. Shutter speed 1/100, Aperture F11, ISO 100, and evaluative metering. Any suggestions? Thanks


----------



## 3bayjunkie (Jan 25, 2011)

you need a gradient filter


----------



## 512_SIR II (Jan 25, 2011)

...I guess I should of mention this in the op. I'm using the 18-55 kit lens.
I've thought about using a gradient filter or a polarizer but the end of my lens rotates when it focuses so those filters are kinda useless.


----------



## BuS_RiDeR (Jan 25, 2011)

512_SIR II said:


> ...I guess I should of mention this in the op. I'm using the 18-55 kit lens.
> I've thought about using a gradient filter or a polarizer but the end of my lens rotates when it focuses so those filters are kinda useless.



Useless?  How so?  most Circular Polarizing filters attach to the lens... Focusing should not affect it...


----------



## 512_SIR II (Jan 25, 2011)

the part it screws onto is the focus ring. so every time it goes to focus the end of the lens rotates and if there is a filter attached then the filter will rotate too.


----------



## tirediron (Jan 25, 2011)

Compose the shot (zoom/focus) and then adjust the filter to suit.


----------



## burgo (Jan 25, 2011)

a simple way you can get by without a graduated filter is to take  2 shots - the first exposure is metered to get the sky (ie sky properly exposed and ground dark), then the second  shot is metered to the foreground(bright blown sky, foreground properly exposed). Then use photoshop layer masks to blend the 2 images together..then you have a perfect sky and a well exposed foreground.


----------



## 512_SIR II (Jan 25, 2011)

tirediron said:


> Compose the shot (zoom/focus) and then adjust the filter to suit.


Good idea. I never thought about that


burgo said:


> a simple way you can get by without a graduated filter is to take  2 shots - the first exposure is metered to get the sky (ie sky properly exposed and ground dark), then the second  shot is metered to the foreground(bright blown sky, foreground properly exposed). Then use photoshop layer masks to blend the 2 images together..then you have a perfect sky and a well exposed foreground.



So try like an hdr sorta thing? I don't have photoshop or lightroom or any of that. So my editing is very minimal. Thats why i'd like to learn how to shoot it right on the spot and not have to worry about major editing.


----------



## burgo (Jan 25, 2011)

512_SIR II said:


> tirediron said:
> 
> 
> > Compose the shot (zoom/focus) and then adjust the filter to suit.
> ...



no not like HDR. Hardly major editing but good luck with it anyway


----------



## flowrider (Jan 26, 2011)

512_SIR II said:


> tirediron said:
> 
> 
> > Compose the shot (zoom/focus) and then adjust the filter to suit.
> ...



Unfortunately, in certain situations you can only expose for the sky or the background and will have to compromise somewhere. The dynamic range is just to great for the sensor to capture which is why people are suggesting fusing two shots or yes, even HDR. The easiest way is to get a square gradient filter and just hold it in front of the lens when taking the shot.


----------



## 3bayjunkie (Jan 26, 2011)

tirediron said:


> Compose the shot (zoom/focus) and then adjust the filter to suit.



i was thinking the same thing but then again that can get annoying real quick. i would suggest getting a different lens...


----------



## JasonLambert (Jan 26, 2011)

Take your reading from the sky and shoot your shot. I added a little fill in post to get the building to be exposed correctly.


----------



## bevoholic (Jan 26, 2011)

I've driven over that bridge many times!  I live in North Austin.  Crazy.  Do you know of any good spots downtown to get a good night shot of the skyline?


----------



## 512_SIR II (Jan 26, 2011)

...yea i need a better lens for the whole filter thing. I'll try whats been suggested and hope I can figure it out. Should I be using a specfic type of metering?



bevoholic said:


> I've driven over that bridge many times!  I live in North Austin.  Crazy.  Do you know of any good spots downtown to get a good night shot of the skyline?



I live in round rock too man, thats cool. I actually don't. I've seen some nice shots that were taken on top of parking garages but i'm not sure which specific ones.


----------



## JasonLambert (Jan 26, 2011)

I personally use spot metering. I like to have total control as to the area I get my reading from.


----------



## 512_SIR II (Jan 26, 2011)

thats what i was thinking. i always use the evaluative but if spot is better then i'll start to venture into that and see how it turn out


----------



## bevoholic (Jan 26, 2011)

I actually just moved from RR into North Austin.  I've seen a few pictures taken from down by the river looking back north into downtown.  I've wanted to get down to that area to try some, but I have no idea where to go.


----------



## 512_SIR II (Jan 26, 2011)

idk if you've ever seen this picture but this is my inspiration, once i can take a photo that looks this amazing then i'll be happy. http://farm1.static.flickr.com/231/497258503_9dde7d27aa.jpg


----------



## Ken Rockwell Fan (Jan 26, 2011)

Use the exposure compensation adjustment and chimp the highlights to taste.


----------



## Buckster (Jan 26, 2011)

3bayjunkie said:


> tirediron said:
> 
> 
> > Compose the shot (zoom/focus) and then adjust the filter to suit.
> ...


If you're going to use a CP, you're going to reach out and make the adjustment anyway when you compose the shot. I've been doing that for a quarter of a century on both kinds of lenses (the ones that turn on the front and those that don't). It's just never been much trouble at all. It's a part of the photographic process when composing the shot, like dialing aperture, shutter, ISO, focus.

To buy a new lens because you think you won't have to adjust the CP during composition seems financially nuts to me. I find lots of reasons to buy new lenses, but that doesn't even come close to being one of them.

YMMV


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Jan 26, 2011)

You can take a photo that looks like that now by shooting at night instead of midday. I would advise a grad filter for daytime although that tree is going to be affected as well. Perhaps the dual exposure blend would work better.


----------



## manaheim (Jan 26, 2011)

Also just be mindful of where the sun is and time your shot accordingly.  If you can, plan your shot.  If you can't, try to come back when the shot is right.

Sun to your back=brilliant blue skies, sun right in your face=washed out white.  Variations in between.  CPOL, dual shot, ND filters, etc. for situations when you have no choice.


----------



## simo110 (Jan 26, 2011)

Too bad the sky looks like that


----------



## skyy38 (Jan 26, 2011)

512_SIR II said:


> I took this shot yesterday while I was a local spot here in Austin (360 bridge). For some reason I couldn't keep the sky from blowing out. I took the shot around 4:30pm so the sun was still pretty harsh and was at about my 2 o clock position. I had the camera set to Av mode and the settings were as follows. Shutter speed 1/100, Aperture F11, ISO 100, and evaluative metering. Any suggestions? Thanks


 
First of all, you took the SHOT ie. ONE shot. Back yourself up and take as many shots as it takes to make sure you get what you want and take them with all sorts of different settings and modes etc.You've got a filmless camera so blast away!!!!

Second, you were also competing directly with the sun, see how it was at your 2 O'Clock position. I would suggest waiting another hour or so until it starts to act like a fill light instead of backlight aggravation. See if you can catch an approaching storm in this area the next time because the darkened sky certainly would help!

Third, with a harsh sun, you needed to be shooting at a shutter speed of at least 1/500 and that's an estimate. I routinely take it anywhere from 1/250 to 1/1250 and maybe beyond, depending. Try shutter priority the next time and let the aperture "hitch a ride" so to speak.

I'll post a pic later that will illustrate how to use the sun to your advantage.


----------



## Fujito (Jan 26, 2011)

Like others have said, you can take 2 exposures and blend them in PS.







You can also use the gradient tool to create an artificial sky in place of a blown out one. It doesn't look great, but it's acceptable sometimes. The problem with this picture is that if you look at the hood of the car you can see the reflection of clouds. The highlighting around the trees is also evident, but this picture was for a car forum, so I let it go.






If you're going to blend two exposures then I'd recommend you take the picture at the evening so you get a more dramatic sky.


----------



## DerekSalem (Jan 26, 2011)

burgo said:


> 512_SIR II said:
> 
> 
> > tirediron said:
> ...



Err...That's *exactly* what HDR is, Burgo. High Dynamic-Range means the end result has a higher range of light than the camera can grab in 1 exposure. What you're telling him to do is literally the *definition* of HDR photography.

And it's most likely the only way to get not blown-out skies and exposed subjects. Also, you could easily shoot at higher than 1/100s shutter speed. No reason to shoot that low in the middle of the day


----------



## NikonNewbie (Jan 26, 2011)

just talked about this situation in a class on Monday...he said to focus on the sky for the light..then focus on the subject, also use exposure compensation.
I dont know if it works...I haven't tried it yet...it's been snowing/raining like a bee-yatch here.


----------



## Ken Rockwell Fan (Jan 26, 2011)

NikonNewbie said:


> just talked about this situation in a class on Monday...he said to focus on the sky for the light..then focus on the subject, also use exposure compensation.
> I dont know if it works...I haven't tried it yet...it's been snowing/raining like a bee-yatch here.



You dont have to focus on the sky. Compose as you normally would and use the matrix meter setting. Take a shot and then review it with the LCD using the highlight setting. It will show you any lost highlights by blinking the overexposed areas in the frame. Then you can adjust the exposure compensation setting by pressing the +/- button and spinning the wheel to adjust the exposure for the next shot. Look in the view finder when you make this adjustment and you will see the meter setting. It looks like this...

+_ _ _ _ _l_ _ _ _ _ -  

It's at the bottom of the finder's display. Repeat until the flashing over exposure shown in the rear LCD goes away.


----------



## SensePhoto (Jan 26, 2011)

this was probably mentioned before but use the bracketing feature if you have one and blend exposures in PS or Photomatix. Just dont make it look to unrealistic like some HDR shots out there


----------



## derikgutowski (Jan 26, 2011)

Go back at sunrise and again at sunset with both filters and play around.  You may have to revisit a site a dozen times (or more) before the light is just right.


----------



## skyy38 (Jan 26, 2011)

As promised.....

Gakona-The Storm 5 MP June 2010 008 p | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

A nice June evening in Gakona, AK sitting on the porch when the God Of Thunder decides he wants to take a drum solo. I had been reading so I didn't notice how dark the sky had become. I got my camera and stayed under the roof in case of rain.

in this picture, beyond the Teepee is east and behind me is west, more or less. This was taken 15 minutes into the storm-in less than 30 minutes it would be over as the clouds provided a convenient hole for the sun to shine through, even as it was heading southwest to Anchorage. The perfect schizoid situation!- Dark background and light foreground!

I took a reading in "P" mode and it gave me 1/250 for a shutter speed but the image in the viewfinder didn't look as pleasingly contrasty as the real thing, so I went to "S" and set it to 1/500. That did it, even by lo-res viewfinder standards. The f stop settled in at 4.5 and that was it- I knew I had it. ISO (in auto-I never mess with it, at least not when there's enough light) came in at 347.Metering was set to "Spot AF Area" but on EXIF it says
"partial"-is this the same thing?

This worked because the sun was behind me. If this had been a TOTAL coverage of clouds, I never would have gotten this shot. And if I had been facing west-well forget about it!

Just keep the sun behind you whenever possible!


----------



## New Hampshire (Jan 26, 2011)

512_SIR II said:


> idk if you've ever seen this picture but this is my inspiration, once i can take a photo that looks this amazing then i'll be happy. http://farm1.static.flickr.com/231/497258503_9dde7d27aa.jpg


 
You won't be able to take this kind of picture in one shot....you will need about three or more since it is an HDR image. 

Brian


----------



## 512_SIR II (Jan 26, 2011)

I appreciate all the help guys. I went back today at sunset and I tried my best to keep in mind everything you guys had mentioned. I think the sky came out a lot better. Waiting till the end of the day when the sun isn't pointing directly at my lens helped so much. I also met a guy there who had a polarizing filter on his kit lens and I know now how easy it is to use one of those even if the end of the lens rotates. He also let me borrow his Joby gorilla pod and now i've got to get one of those things, it was pretty cool. I know there are more ways and techniques I have yet to try as to solving my problem but the information I got from you guys sure helped a lot, thanks. 
1.



2.



3.



4.



5.


----------



## bevoholic (Jan 26, 2011)

Love 1 and 5.  2 and 3 don't do anything for me.  For me personally, the angle of 4 is off.  I like how in 5 you're looking more down the road.


----------



## Pepperpwni (Jan 27, 2011)

a LOT better! glad to see this update.
#1 I think you're framing should be a little more to the right of the left should be cropped out. I think having the tree on the left portion of the frame would be nice, rather than having all that extra space inbetween the lefthand portion of your shot and the tree. It might make it feel more "complete"

Overall, good job!


----------



## DerekSalem (Jan 27, 2011)

I'll say this...stay away from the Gorillapod. It's not a bad tripod for connecting it to a pole or leaving it stationary on the ground without getting the camera dirty...but it's functionally useless for anything else.

Get a real Tripod and you'll be completely satisfied with it.


----------



## 512_SIR II (Jan 28, 2011)

I plan on getting an actual tripod along with the gorilla pod. Thanks again fro all the help guys.


----------



## iNick (Jan 30, 2011)

i love the composition even tho the sky is blown out, the shot is still cool IMO. I have trouble with this too sometimes, keep it up!
Cheers!
-Nick


----------



## D-B-J (Jan 30, 2011)

Merging two shots can be a useful technique, but can also be a pain.

Regards,
Jake


----------



## Shawnda (Jan 30, 2011)

512_SIR II said:


> the part it screws onto is the focus ring. so every time it goes to focus the end of the lens rotates and if there is a filter attached then the filter will rotate too.


 

This doesn't matter at all....  you'll get the same look no matter where the filter is at, considering its all the same in a complete circle  :lmao::lmao:


----------



## Shawnda (Jan 30, 2011)

@512 -  

I am going to be in Austin on Saturday and would love to grab some of these photos from this spot .... can you tell me where exactly it is.  I live in Dallas and don't know that area well.  The photography club here is meeting up with the Austin photography club there and we're going out shooting for the day.  If you're interested in joining us - I can tell ya where it is that we are meeting up on the 5 Feb 2011.


----------



## enzodm (Jan 30, 2011)

512_SIR II said:


> the part it screws onto is the focus ring. so every time it goes to focus the end of the lens rotates and if there is a filter attached then the filter will rotate too.



This is true for a gradient filter, but a circular polarizer is made for this situation. Anyway, you can always adjust it after focusing.

EDIT: apologies, I missed to end reading the thread. Anyway, morning and late afternoon are called golden hours, and are the best time for photos. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_hour_(photography)


----------



## 512_SIR II (Jan 30, 2011)

Shawnda said:


> @512 -
> 
> I am going to be in Austin on Saturday and would love to grab some of these photos from this spot .... can you tell me where exactly it is.  I live in Dallas and don't know that area well.  The photography club here is meeting up with the Austin photography club there and we're going out shooting for the day.  If you're interested in joining us - I can tell ya where it is that we are meeting up on the 5 Feb 2011.



the bridge is at north capital of texas hwy and west courtyard dr. 
I'd love to join you guys but i'm going to a car show that day here in town. (cupcakemeet.com)


----------



## R.D. (Jan 30, 2011)

cool ****, I actually became more interested in that tree than the bridge. oddly.


----------



## Shawnda (Jan 30, 2011)

512_SIR II said:


> Shawnda said:
> 
> 
> > @512 -
> ...



Is the area where you are at in those photos hard to get too?  Parking near by?


----------



## Nolan (Jan 30, 2011)

Take 2 shots. One exposed for the sky, and the other for the bridge. Then merge the 2 in PS. Do this and you will a have nice balanced exposer for the photograph.


----------



## 512_SIR II (Jan 30, 2011)

Shawnda said:


> 512_SIR II said:
> 
> 
> > Shawnda said:
> ...



Yea its real easy, unless your in a wheel chair. Just go through the light at courtyard dr. and there will be parking (dirt) on the right just before the bridge. walk up the cliff and your there. you can walk up either the right side or the left but the left is a lot steeper.


----------



## Croissant Seven (Jan 31, 2011)

I need practice with Photoshop, so I dropped the image in and played with some layer masks and came up with this, it's not a meticulous job and it looks sort of phony, but it kind of illustrates the value of Photoshop IMO. 







I made 3 separate masks, one for the sky, the water, and the trees in the background, which were sort of washed out by the haze in the air.

With the sky, I dialed back the exposure and added some blue and green in the channel mixer. Again, I didn't go through the details in the branches to get it perfect.

With the water, I did pretty much the same thing, but added a bit of saturation and vibrance to make it more colorful, which helps it match the sky. I live in a clear water area, so I don't honestly know what river water looks like in Texas. 

With the trees, I just brought the exposure down a notch to make them stand out a little bit.

Not sure if this helps you, but it's how I'd go about fixing that image, which I think is fantastic from a composition standpoint. 

/hack photoshop job.
C7


----------



## 512_SIR II (Jan 31, 2011)

Nice man, thanks. Looks a lot cleaner. About the color of the river water in texas....it's um, not so nice looking. pretty dark and sorta green. the problem is i dont have photoshop or ligtroom so i cant do all that layer stuff. i appreciate you taking the time to do it for me though =]


----------



## 512_SIR II (Jan 31, 2011)

wow. i just went and looked at the original. looks so much better man! i need photoshop...or the skills to shoot it right the first time ha, both will come with time


----------



## Croissant Seven (Jan 31, 2011)

512_SIR II said:


> Nice man, thanks. Looks a lot cleaner. About the color of the river water in texas....it's um, not so nice looking. pretty dark and sorta green. the problem is i dont have photoshop or ligtroom so i cant do all that layer stuff. i appreciate you taking the time to do it for me though =]



If you enroll in a Photoshop course at the local community college, you basically get the class and PS for the price you'd pay for PS if you're not a student. Just a thought if you have a little scratch to throw around. It's a fantastic program to have and you'd get a semester of instruction on how to use it properly.


----------



## Croissant Seven (Jan 31, 2011)

512_SIR II said:


> wow. i just went and looked at the original. looks so much better man! i need photoshop...or the skills to shoot it right the first time ha, both will come with time



There are some things that you're not going to be able to get with the camera, due to weather conditions or perhaps a lack of time to get the perfect shot, that can be "fixed" in PS with just small tweaks. It adds a whole new dimension to digital photography, and there are very few pros out there who don't use it for at least SOME editing work.


----------



## manaheim (Jan 31, 2011)

Shawnda said:


> 512_SIR II said:
> 
> 
> > the part it screws onto is the focus ring. so every time it goes to focus the end of the lens rotates and if there is a filter attached then the filter will rotate too.
> ...


 


enzodm said:


> 512_SIR II said:
> 
> 
> > the part it screws onto is the focus ring. so every time it goes to focus the end of the lens rotates and if there is a filter attached then the filter will rotate too.
> ...


 
Are you guys 100% sure of this?


----------



## enzodm (Jan 31, 2011)

manaheim said:


> Are you guys 100% sure of this?



no; I forgot to switch brain on before answering :blushing:. You have to adjust polarizer after focus, of course.


----------



## vtf (Jan 31, 2011)

manaheim said:


> Shawnda said:
> 
> 
> > 512_SIR II said:
> ...


 
It all depends on the lens you use. ie my 50 mm outer shell spins but the lens barrel where the filter secures does not. On my 18-55 the lens barrel spins where the lens attaches.


----------



## Buckster (Jan 31, 2011)

vtf said:


> manaheim said:
> 
> 
> > Shawnda said:
> ...


 You missed the point.  They're saying that it doesn't matter if the polarizer spins - it will act the same no matter how it's rotated.  That's not true.  They're mistaken.


----------



## vtf (Jan 31, 2011)

Buckster said:


> vtf said:
> 
> 
> > manaheim said:
> ...


 
You're right, I missed that. I was only mentioning that once its adjusted for the scene that readjusting it after focusing each time is only dependant on the lens barrel.


----------



## Croissant Seven (Jan 31, 2011)

Buckster said:


> You missed the point.  They're saying that it doesn't matter if the polarizer spins - it will act the same no matter how it's rotated.  That's not true.  They're mistaken.



Help a brotha out, here. I have a circular polarizer but I haven't slapped it on my lens yet (haven't had any bluebird powpow days since I bought it). Is there a particular orientation I need to use? My lens doesn't rotate.
Thanks!


----------



## Buckster (Jan 31, 2011)

Croissant Seven said:


> Buckster said:
> 
> 
> > You missed the point. They're saying that it doesn't matter if the polarizer spins - it will act the same no matter how it's rotated. That's not true. They're mistaken.
> ...


The polarizer rotates on it's own.  You rotate it to get different effects, depending on where the light is coming from, which determines how the reflections are occuring.  You can see the differences as you rotate.  Stop rotating when it looks good to you.


----------



## vtf (Jan 31, 2011)

Croissant Seven said:


> Buckster said:
> 
> 
> > You missed the point. They're saying that it doesn't matter if the polarizer spins - it will act the same no matter how it's rotated. That's not true. They're mistaken.
> ...


 
You will focus then you will rotate the filter to obtain the desired effect you want. If the barrel that the filter attaches to does not rotate thats all you do.
If the barrel that the filter attaches does rotate each time you focus, you need to readjust filter each time.
This might help.
How To Use A Polarizing Filter


----------



## Croissant Seven (Jan 31, 2011)

vtf said:


> Croissant Seven said:
> 
> 
> > Buckster said:
> ...



AHAHAHA I just opened the box and examined the filter for the first time, and whaddaya know? Damn thing rotates.:lmao:

Hi, I'm Admiral Rook N00b, and I sail The Failboat.
C7


----------



## manaheim (Jan 31, 2011)

I swear...


----------



## Croissant Seven (Jan 31, 2011)

manaheim said:


> I swear...



Swearing makes the Baby Jesus cry.


----------



## radiorickm (Jan 31, 2011)

Just a couple of thoughts/suggenstion...

#1, like someone mentioned, force the camera to meter for the sky, if those are the details you want correctly exposed. You should be able to seperate the focus lock and AE lock. if not, just take the reading, and then change to manual and put the settings in.

#2, while in the AV mode, try the in-camera exposure compensation. try taking pictures at several stop differences than what the light meter recommends. Auto bracketing may work in your camera, if not do it manually.

good luck


----------

