Exposure problem

I seems I am doing everything right but my new 70D is acting very strange.  I have it set up on a tripod to take photos of a waterfall.  It is not sunny so I don't use the neutral desity filter.  I have it set on TV and I change the setting from 1 to 2 seconds.  The first shot at 1 sec chooses an aperture of 7.1, the second and third shots of 1.6 and 2 it chooses an aperture of 20 or above and the shots come out very dark, and often blurry.  And then when I shoot hand held on P, it overexposes most, but not all, of the shots.  Why the inconsistancy??

The aperture should narrow by one stop if you double the exposure length. In your example it moved more than one stop, more than 3 stops actually. Something in the scene was messing with your automatic metering. Backlighting from the sky? Weird reflections off of the water?
You are dealing with a tripod already. I would just shoot manual and avoid the problem rather than playing around with exposure comp or switching between spot metering and scene metering etc.
Personally I would not use as high an ISO as 500 for a long exposure on a crop sensor unless you were really set on getting a 1 second exposure here rather than a 4 second one for artistic reasons. I hate noise and lack of detail perhaps more than is warranted but if I could use ISO 100 or 200 by lengthening exposure a second or two I would.
Scott
Canon 6D, Canon T3i, EF 70-200mm L f/2.8 IS mk2; EF 24-105 f/4 L; EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS; EF 85mm f/1.8; Sigma 35mm f/1.4 "Art"; EF 1.4x extender mk. 3; 3x Phottix Mitros+ speedlites
Why do so many people say "fer-tographer"? Do they take "fertographs"?

Similar Messages

  • LR 4 exposure problem

    I'm using LR 4 which I've just upgraded to 4.1
    I'm finding that when using the auto function in the develop module that most of my images are coming out either vastly under or over exposed.
    This didn't happen with LR 3.6
    The exposure problem happens after I 'update the process version', if I don't do the update then the auto exposure seems to be a lot better.
    Have you had this problem and can I undo the 'update the process version' to take the images I've already converted back to where they were?

    Hi,
    You can always download the LR version 5.6 from the update page from Adobe:
    Product updates or Adobe - Lightroom : For Windows
    There is also a possibility that the Panel is hidden, When you right click on the Develop Module on the Right side,
    You can enable the panels. Basic is the Panel where the Exposure options should be reflected.
    When this doesn't work, you can try creating a New Catalog, before you completly try to reinstall the application.
    Hope this helps.

  • Exposure problem with Lightroom 4 CS5 and Raw 6.7

    Hi all
    I have recently upgraded from Lightroom 3.6 to the new Lightroom 4 and am genrally pretty happy with it, I tend to use it along with photoshop CS5 extended and also imagenomic Portraiture, but I have found an annoying little problem in doing this and something that I never suffered with when using Lightroom 3.6 and it is this...
    when I take an image from Lightroom 4 and click Edit image in Photoshop CS5 and then use Imageonmic to soften skin etc all seems to work well I then carry out any touching up within Photoshop and once finished save it back to lightroom for any final tweaks etc which is fine and all works smoothly, except once I have saved it back to Lightroom the exposure has been pushed up about 3-4 stops at least , meaning I then have to pull it down again and this can sometimes result in extra editing I could do with out. now I know its not the end of the world and is probably just a bug that I'm hoping will be sorted within Lightroom 4 but I just wondered if anyone else has had a similar problem, is it a bug or am I doing something wrong? (although I'm doing the same with Lighroom 4 as i used to do with LIghtroom 3.6 and that worked fine)
    Oh one more thing I should mention to get lightroom 4 and CS5 to work properly together I had to go into the Adobe Labs site and download the Camera RAW 6.7 software for CS5 so it could also be a bug here i guess.

    There have been several posts over on the Lightroom forum, and other non-Adobe forums also, about this issue: it seems that there's a bug in ACR 6.7RC which causes the image to be over-expose, compared with the setting applied using PV2012 in LR. I guess this is the kind of thing a Release Candidate is supposed to flag up! I was all set to upgrade my own ACR to ensure that PS would recognise my LR4 edits (I normally avoid RC versions and wait for the final), but all the reports of this problem have stopped me from doing so.
    In the meantime, best option so far as I'm aware is to process the image in LR (you get the option when you choose to edit in PS), meaning that it does all the rendering before passing it over to PS (otherwise, ACR handles the conversion of the raw file into TIFF). This does however mean that smart-objects and so on are temporarily out of the equation.
    I'm sure this will all be resolved pretty soon.
    Edit: in fact, one of the posts I mentioned is about ten posts down in this very forum: http://forums.adobe.com/thread/974963?tstart=0
    M

  • Nikon D800 Multiple Exposure problem in Aperture

    When I shoot multiple exposures with the new Nikon D800, import into Aperture (latest greatest version with all updates up-to-date) the image imported looks NOTHING like what was on the saved/merged image in-camera and appears red-red-red. Shot a bunch last night had issue with every one. Think there might be an overlooked glitch here. Everything else seems to work 100% with D800, but this might be glitch.
    So, I wanted to be sure I wasn't seeing things, took the camera to kid's soccer game today to further test, got home and loaded 'em into Aperture, same exact thing. The blown-out ones are the multiple exposures (look perfect in-camera) and as you can see the following photo is as it was shot (non-red ones to the right of the selected 5 that are blow-out examples.)

    I don't think it's magic dust and it's definitely been used for more than 100 years....there aren't Multiple photos, it's 1 photo exposed multiple times with and end net of 1 photo. This is NOT like HDR where you have multiple photos at different EV and merge, this is 1 photo and shutter actuated on SAME photo multiple times. In other words, there is no "series" of photos to look at....1 photo. Cannot understand why Aperture is having stuch a problem with this when it didn't have the problem with D700 files.
    Multiple Exposure Examples below.

  • Photomerge Exposure Problem.

    Hi, to take a photo of a room, and the view through its window, and ensure they are both correctly exposed, Im having problems in Photoshop Elements 10. When I press Done to complete the task the colour of the room walls etc all look badly colour smudged. Ive tried several times to no avail.

    I think that bug probably had to do more with some kind of exif data that pse 8 didn't like, as John mentions, rather than the actual file size.
    (they seemed to have fixed that issue in pse 10 from experimenting with the sample images in the link you posted)
    As an experiment i used three 25 mp images (6144x4085 pixel dimensions each image) in pse 8 in both photomerge panorama and photomerge exposure and
    it seemed to work ok, so maybe your either running up against the exif data bug or if your using camera raw images they may be set to output in 16 bits/channel
    which elements doesn't like. Of course ram and the amount of scratch disk you have available can also be factors.
    MTSTUNER

  • Fixing Exposure Problem

    I've noticed in one of my shots I briefly decreased and then increased the manual exposure on my camera (not sure why I did this). The result is pretty noticeable and I'm wondering if there is any way this can be fixed in Color. I've tried fixing it in FCP with no luck.

    I fix at least one of these in practically every video project I've worked on as a colorist, coming up to 14 years now. But I have only ever seen two instances in film-originated projects. One of them was because the focus puller grabbed the T-ring instead of the focus ring. He was threatened with death and never did it again, to my knowledge, and he is still alive and working! The second one was the operator himself who did the same thing and it only showed up in dailies before Action, but he was still reprimanded by the DP. You're allowed one, I guess...
    At any rate, in COLOR, grab a good still, split it so you get a good grey-scale range, so that you can see the whole black-to-white range and count on keyframing every frame. Use the frame-step to jog back and forth a lot. It will not be a simple gain offset. Every parameter will change, and non-linearly. You will likely do it a couple of times. And then no one will notice that you pulled a rabbit out of "somewhere".
    jPo

  • Live! Wireless all white from night to day (exposure problem)

    I purchased 4 of these cameras so that I could monitor my house while I'm away for a few weeks. Unfortunately I've been let down in a big way. The cameras seem to adjust their exposure levels based on whenever they are powered up or are reset. If I leave motion detection operating from day to night, then night to day, the result is a totally white picture. Resetting it seems to work.
    However, I'm going to be gone!! It's ridiculous that I have to be there to reset it everyday. The outside of the box says it has "auto exposure". Now, I have some third party software called ActiveCam which is alot better than the Creative software (simply because it has more features). It might be able to send a reset command to the camera, but I need the URL string that can do this. Any ideas?
    Thanks.

    I found the same issue with streaming HD "Up" movie. I'm in normal 801.11N (b and g compatible) and not at 5-mhz. I only have a MacBook, and running wireless via TimeCapsule (I'm in the same room as the TC and the AppleTV). Never had any issues in the past few years streaming regular iTunes library from this MB, granted it's all been SD until now.
    I just 'synched' the movie to my AppleTV (vs. streaming) and it now works great directly from the aTV drive. I don't have many HD movies yet, and I usually just 'stream' so synching just the HD flicks is a temp solution until someday I have a majority of HD. Oh well! By that time maybe Apple will have a modernized version of the HW/SW and stop treating AppleTV as a 'hobby'.
    Doesn't solve the tech issue, but just FYI - I have seen the same thing and not sure it's just the 5-mhz issue.

  • Photomerge - Panorama - How to Blend Exposure Problems

    What is the best way to eliminate the differences in exposures in the image?  The are light and dark area and I would like to eliminate the dark streaks (for lack of a better word).  Any help would be appreciated.  The panorama was done in Photomerge - Panorama in PSE 10.
    Thanks.

    Use the Dodge Tool with these settings:
    Size:  200px
    Range:  Midtones
    Exposure:  4%
    Keep painting over the dark areas, slowly bringing them up to blend nicely:
    Ken

  • Exposure control errors when recording videos with...

    I noticed that when I record videos, the exposure sometimes is not adjusted properly. If lighting conditions change, exposure remains at the same level, and records became over or underexposed. This is especially noticeable outdoors.
    I have a few minutes long sample recording where the recording starts normally, then as light conditions change, (I slowly move from a shady area to a lit area) exposure gradually degrades to a point where most of the recording "burns out" due to extreme overexposure ( about 80% of the picture is white). 
    What confuses me is when I tried to reproduce this problem (albeit it different lighting conditions), exposure control worked pretty good.
    I wonder if these exposure problems are due to a bug, hardware problem or a device limitation.
    Do you have any tips to get better recordings with the phone?
    Nokia Lumia 520 3046.0000.1329.2001 RM-914
    Nokia Asha 302 V15.09 22-05-13 RM-813

    The phone runs the latest firmware (3.36) available currently. There are no  image-related  changes mentioned in the 3.36 changelog though.
    Nokia Lumia 520 3046.0000.1329.2001 RM-914
    Nokia Asha 302 V15.09 22-05-13 RM-813

  • Exposure to the right results in different TRC than normal exposure

    Exposure to the right is advocated by most experts to improve tonality and dynamic range. On the Luminous Landscape a photographer noted that ETTR all the way to the right followed by negative exposure correction in ACR produces a different image than is produced by normal exposure, and that he preferred the latter image.
    Luminous Landscape Thread
    Most responders to this post postulated that, since ACR is operating on linear data, underexposure by 1 EV followed by a 1 EV boost in ACR would produce the same results.
    I had some exposures of a Stouffer step wedge. The first was exposed so that step 1 has a pixel value of 250 when converted with ACR at default settings into aRGB. This is exposed to the right as far as possible. A second exposure placed the same step at 221, and this step was brought back to 250 in ACR, which required an exposure compensation of +1.05 EV.
    If you compare the resultant images in Photoshop using the difference blending mode, the differences too dark to make out on the screen, but can be detected with the eye dropper. In this image, normal exposure to the right is on top, and the difference between normal exposure and underexposure followed by a boost of 1 EV in ACR is shown on the bottom.
    The different resulting tone response curves are better shown by Imatest plots of the two images. As is evident the TRCs are different, contrary to my expectation. Comments are invited.

    The ETTR Myth
    ETTR is short for expose to the right. Some folks have promoted it as a replacement for traditional exposure metering. The premise is that you can validate camera metering by simply reading the histogram in the cameras preview window.
    Unfortunately, it is based on some basic misunderstandings about digital photographic technology. The first misunderstanding is the premise that each bit level in a digitally encoded image represents an exposure stop. The second misunderstanding is the premise that all digital cameras capture light in a perfectly linear fashion. The third misunderstanding is the premise that the histogram represents the raw image data captured by the camera. I will briefly address each of these.
    Any correlation between exposure stops and digital bit levels can only be accidental at best. The total exposure range in a scene or an image is correctly known as the dynamic range. The dynamic range of digital cameras is wider than most folks assumes and usually equal to or better than film or paper. It can be defined in terms of tone density, decibels, or exposure stops. It is a function of the optics and sensor electronics in the camera. The few cases where an accurate range is provided by the vendors, it varies from 8 to 12 f/stops.
    The image data is converted from analog measurements by the analog/digital (A/D) circuits early in the capture. This can wind up as an 8-bit, 12-bit, 14-bit, or even 16-bit digital value depending on the camera and its user settings. It is simply a number that has been digitized. Any correlation between bits and exposure levels is pure speculation, end of subject.
    Second, the digital capture of light is not strictly linear. It is true that the silicon sensor itself will capture light in a very linear fashion. But this ignores reciprocity at the toe and heel of the extremes, the quantum efficiency of the substrate, and most importantly it ignores the optical filters in front of the sensor. If the color filter array were linear it would be impossible to reconstruct colors. And these are not the only optical filters in your camera. Then, the A/D circuits have gain controls based on the current ISO setting. And some A/D circuits perform some pre-processing based on the illuminant color temperature (white balance) and limited noise reduction based on the ISO setting. The point is that there are many steps in the pipeline that can introduce non-linearity.
    Finally, the image in the preview window has been color rendered and re-sampled down to a small size. This is the data shown in the histogram. The camera can capture all colors in the spectrum, but the rendered image is limited to the gamut of an RGB color space. So, in addition to exposure clipping the histogram will include gamut clipping. This is also true for the blinking highlight and shadow tools. This might imply an exposure problem when none exists. There is no practical way to map all the data in a raw image into a histogram that you could use effectively in the preview window.
    If you capture an image of a gray scale chart that fits within the dynamic range of the camera, at the right exposure, you can create a linear graph of the raw data. But if you underexpose or overexpose this same image, the graph will not be linear and it is unlikely that software will be able to restore true linearity. End of subject.
    If you typically shoot JPG format, the histogram will accurately represent the image data. But clipping can still be from either gamut or exposure limits. If you typically shoot RAW format, the cameras histogram is only an approximation of what the final rendered image might look like. There is a significant amount of latitude provided by the RAW image editor. This is probably why you are shooting RAW in the first place.
    So, in closing, I am not saying that histograms are bad. They are part of a wonderful toolkit of digital image processing tools. I am saying ETTR is not a replacement for exposure metering. If you understand what the tone and color range of the scene is, you can evaluate the histogram much better. And if you master traditional photographic metering, you will capture it more accurately more often.
    I hope this clears up my previous statements on this subject. And I hope it explains why I think ETTR and linear capture are based more on technical theology than on technical fact.
    Cheers, Rags :-)

  • Secondary exposure correction?

    Is there any way to correct spot exposure problems [ie. clipping] like you can correct secondary color with Three-Way Color Corrector?
    I have a clip where a white box that reflects too much--it moves, so I need the exposure correction to move as well--like color corrections move with the Secondary Color Correction, but with exposure instead.
    I just need to tone-it done some, if possible.
    I tried using the Three-Way, but there isn't enough color to grab.
    Any advice? And thanks.

    You can do secondary correction with the luma corrector.

  • ISight Camera not working after Leopard install

    On my 1st gen Intel 20" iMac, after the Leopard upgrade -- which went very smoothly -- my iSight camera no longer works. I have tried it in Photo Booth and iChat Video and it is the same in each, so it is the camera, apparently, not the application using it.
    In the self-viewing screen on my iMac, I see myself for just a second or so, then I fade out quickly and there is nothing to see but black. If I shine a desk lamp in my face, then I can just barely see the outline of my image but the picture is mostly black. It seems like an exposure problem: the camera seems to adjust, shutting down as though I am very brightly lit but since I am not, it produces only a black picture.
    I also have a 1st gen Intel white MacBook that I have also upgraded to Leopard. The iSight camera seems to work just fine on that computer. I tried out the video in Photo Booth and it worked great.
    Any ideas?

    Hi,
    I too am having the same problem, and I'm using the old school iSight camera and immediately after installing Leopard, it won't work. I can't even power up the camera. It will power up for about 3 seconds then power down as fast as the little green light came on. It was fine about an hour before the 10.5 install. I powered down and unplugged everything for about 10 mins. then plugged it all back in, and still not working. So I am back to the drawing board trying to sort this out. If anyone has anymore thoughts on this, pls. chime in. All the suggestions seem to work for you folks after a little tweak. I even booted into OF mode and reset-nvram and reset-all for kicks to give it an even fresher start.
    thanks!

  • Slideshow in Encore, best image format

    I have imported an HD timeline into encore CS4, and generated two short slideshows (JPEG). When I transcode and burn a Standard Definition DVD, the slide show images are terrible ( grainy, exposure problems,etc). The JPEG images look good on my computer screen when I render the slideshow in encore. The slideshow has audio, also.  Do I need to use a different file format for the slideshow images ?  Thanks for any help.  Jean Matusik

    Jeanmatu wrote:
    Ok Jim, thanks for the response.  I will import the images into PP CS4 and try that. If Adobe purports the slideshow as a feature of Encore, it ought to work?  I have gotten the slideshow feature to work well on a HD-blu ray project using the same size images for a different project and just wonder why the same size images (different subject) look lousy in SD  DVD?  Jean
    But are they really the same size?
    SD is 720 x 480 and HD is up to 1920 x 1080, and your original JPRG images may well have been automatically resized to fit, and a JPEG is lossy encoding anywayt (zoom right in 7 see how blocky things get).
    HD may well be keeping them the same size.
    I would try to use lossless TIF or BMP images to keep quality the highest possible anbd edit a sequence using Premiere instead of the Encore Slideshow

  • CMOS vs CCD

    The new Sony Cameras are all CMOS including the latest replacement for the Z1. Question: is it not true that 3CCD is still better than CMOS? I'm hesitating between the Z1/G1 and the new 3 CMOS Sony Camera.

    Here is a comparison of the EX and HVX:
    http://www.slashcam.de/artikel/Test/...y-PMW-EX1.html
    The site is in German (and the pre-release EX tested had exposure problems) and I can't vouch for the methodology, but it appears as though the EX wins in low light. (Try Google translation for an approximation of English).
    As for mpeg-2 (the EX1 uses an mpeg-4 wrapper), the mpeg-2 spec applies to decoding only, not encoding, so this is not your mother's codec. It has steadily improved over the years.
    As to usability of mpeg-2 within Premiere, the following quote in Digital Content Producer magazine has me puzzled "Premiere Pro 2 reportedly already handles EX1's MP4 files with aplomb - drop 'n' drag style...". Could this be an accurate statement? I was thinking Cineform would be required.

  • Firefox not loading properly

    I have Firefox installed on my desktop pc running windows xp professional. I had been using an older version but recently updated to the current version (4.01). Since then whenever I open up the firefox browser the page is all distorted The only way that i can really describe it is that it is sort of like a double exposure. I did do a print screen and then pasted it into a word document in hopes that I could attach it here but I don't see a place to add attachments. The actual address bar (for entering the website you want to go to can't be viewed (can click for new tab and start typing the address but you can't view it because of what is like a double exposure of the tabs at the top of the page).
    Even the firefox website has the same sort of visual affect to it. I have tried going to about:config and entering network.dns.disableIPv6;false and switching that to true (no change)
    I have also tried adding network.dns.disablePrefetch;true to the about:config with no luck either (even tried switching it to false). I have also checked the proxy settings (just in case) and compared them to IE (checked the MS guide to proxy settings as well). None of this helped with the browser itself. Even if I try right clicking and refreshing / reloading the page it does not help. As well as closing the browser entirely and then reopening it. But oddly enough it will sometimes (if I don't get frustrated and just switch to the Google Chrome browser) suddenly be working properly.
    I have also tried disabling NoScript which I also installed after updating to the newest version of Firefox but that didn't have any affect either. Yet like I said it will sometimes just suddenly start working properly.
    I also use thee same browser with the same settings, add-ons/extensions and plugins on my laptop which is running Vista Home premium and I have no problems there when I open up the firefox browser.
    Any assistance would be so VERY Much Appreciated.

    just an update - this problem will also come back on the webpage itself - in fact it did so just after posting the question above . Only this time the semi double exposure problem was only on the page itself and did not affect the top of the browser.

Maybe you are looking for