This exercise follows on nicely from the previous exercise which I completed last week. One of the benefits , in my view, of a digital camera is the ability to check your images as you go along. The view of an image on the rear screen can give you a reasonable indication of what your image may turn out like. In fact on my camera you can even shoot with live view and this shows both the histogram and the image on the rear screen as you take the shot , as shown here:-
This is a great help and saves a lot of time in post production. I am trying , as I go through the course , to get the shots right in the camera and not after hours of work on the computer.
As the course notes state you will get a highlight warning if you are taking an image of the sun or a bright bulb, this can not be helped, but most other times a further shot taken with a little more thought and care should mean that the image reaches the required standard.
I was asked to take an image of a scene that had contrast. I chose an image of a National Trust property. The cold stone walls and slate roof were set against a bright blue sky. I was asked to take a series of images at different settings.
The highlight clipping warning was activated and the warning area can be seen in the images as a red area, which flashes on and off on the camera.
In image 4 the red flashing highlight warning is just out of shot, it’s on the left onto of the roof.
Here are images 1 and 2 in detail to show you how they look with the warning area flashing. As you can see there is a great deal of difference between the two.
As you can see there needs to be a happy medium between both images. Post production can reduce the highlights whilst .
After some research I found some interesting website that explain how to alter your images. The “How to Geek” website was simple and interesting.
After removing the warning area from each of the images it was interesting to see what the detail of the image was like. Would the colours and shapes still be there, how would two very different colours or surfaces look like if the images were not altered in post production.
I chose a section of the end wall with the blue sky behind it. The wall had a stone capping which as you can see goes through a remarkable change as the highlights are reduced.
There is , as you can see a total loss of detail to the top left of the stone, the edge of the stone is missing as it merges with the sky. The detail in the edge of the tile line is also missing.
As per the instructions in the exercise I then used the recovery tool to adjust the image and here is the result, I have also left the histogram in to show you what it looks like.
I like the end result, there is detail and a nice range of both colour and tone.
Looking at the area mentioned above you can see the detail in the stone and the sky. Here is a close up for added information.
This has been another interesting topic to look at. The clipping tool on the camera and in photoshop is a tool that I will now look at in a different way.
I hope that my images will improve now that I have a greater knowledge of what it can and more importantly can not do.
I still think that it is better for me to get the images right in camera , of course I can check the histogram after each shot and make my adjustments in camera rather than on the computer.
Although some would say that the computer has just replace the darkroom. But I think that this is rather a simplistic view.