Better Beamer technique

Rohirrim

I took this shot with a Better Beamer a couple days ago. The sky was overcast, this shot was taken with the Beamer set with a +2 FEC and yet the lighting is still very flat. I did have it set on 50mm. Did I do something wrong? or is this as good as I can expect.

This is the capture with no PP. I know that I can PP to improve the shot, but I was hoping for a better starting point.



EXIF
Model: Canon EOS 20D
Aperture: f/4.0
ISO: 200
Focal Length: 500mm (guess: 530mm in 35mm)
Exposure Time: 0.0031s (1/320)
Flash: Flash fired, compulsory flash mode
Exposure Program: Aperture priority
Exposure Bias: 1.3333333333333
ColorSpace: sRGB

Shay Stephens

Do you have manual control over the flash? If so then crank it to maximum output and see what happens. You need a lot of flash power to make a difference when shooting outside during the day.

Now with that said, unless the flash is off camera and off to the side, you won't be seeing much more than flat lighting anyway, and doubly so with the bird surrounded by white reflecting snow.

Rohirrim

Shay Stephens wrote:

Do you have manual control over the flash? If so then crank it to maximum output and see what happens. You need a lot of flash power to make a difference when shooting outside during the day.

Now with that said, unless the flash is off camera and off to the side, you won't be seeing much more than flat lighting anyway, and doubly so with the bird surrounded by white reflecting snow.

Thank you for your input Shay. I do have the Flash (a Canon 550EX) set up on a Wimberly Telephoto Flash Bracket so it looks like this http://www.tripodhead.com/images/tpb2.jpg

From your post though it sounds like I should have tried cranking up the Flash even higher than +2.

pathfinder

Try setting the zoom on the flash at 75mm or 100mm with the Beamer and see if that helps at all, too.

jfriend

Might be impossible without a curve in your camera

Rohirrim wrote:

I took this shot with a Better Beamer a couple days ago. The sky was overcast, this shot was taken with the Beamer set with a +2 FEC and yet the lighting is still very flat. I did have it set on 50mm. Did I do something wrong? or is this as good as I can expect.

This is the capture with no PP. I know that I can PP to improve the shot, but I was hoping for a better starting point.

This is just a difficult shot to capture right out of the camera. ALL the detail you want in the bird is in the darkest 1/3 of the histogram. That means to capture that detail right out of the camera and show it as a mid-tone with contrast, you'd have to massively overexpose the snow. Since a +2 exposure compensation just normally brings snow up to it's normal bright point, you'd probably need +3 or even +3.5 EV compensation in your flash metering system if you wanted the bird to be properly exposed using any sort of matrix metering that sees the snow.

If your flash system supports any form of spot metering on the darker color bird, that could also be an answer because then you wouldn't need nearly as much flash compensation since the spot metering on the darker color should ignore the bright snow and would tend to push the darker colors of the bird nearer a mid-tone (which is what you want so you can see detail in it).

Or, you can just go for post processing on images with this much challenge. Because the bird is completely isolated from the snow in tone, the post processing is actually pretty straightforward and can get you the best of both worlds where you don't blow highlights in the snow and you get to see detail in the bird. This is what I got with post processing. 90% of this effect is achieved with a curve that just boosts the lower 3rd of the histogram while keeping the snow unaffected. Without putting a curve of this type into your camera (or some similar setting), I don't think you could ever get this right out of the camera. The camera will either produce what you got or make the bird brighter, but blow highlights in the snow. Sometimes PP might just be the best answer.

Rohirrim

Thank you John and Pathfinder. I appreciate your ideas.

pathfinder

jfriend is correct that there is extreme differences in the light and dark part of the image in your bird. That is precisely the reason for shooting in Av mode in ETTL with a Beamer. It will set the basic exposure for the background ( and in snow a +1.5 EC or so is reasonable ) and the flash will correctly expose the foreground even with a Beamer. That is what is lovely about fill flash.

I shot some birdies last winter with a Beamer - here is an example similar to yours shot with a Beamer in Av mode - 1DMII f8 1/400 ISO 200 600mm - Flash fired compulsory flash mode

[imgr]http://pathfinder.smugmug.com/photos/14988734-L.jpg[/imgr]

Here is another f8 1/250 ISO 200 600mm Flash fired, compulsory flash mode

[imgl]http://pathfinder.smugmug.com/photos/14988738-L.jpg[/imgl]

Note the catchlights in the eyes.

I suspect that these could pop more now, with processing in LAB, and manipulating the L channel and the AB curves.

jfriend

Distance separation from background is the key to fill flash

pathfinder wrote:

jfriend is correct that there is extreme differences in the light and dark part of the image in your bird. That is precisely the reason for shooting in Av mode in ETTL with a Beamer. It will set the basic exposure for the background ( and in snow a +1.5 EC or so is reasonable ) and the flash will correctly expose the foreground even with a Beamer. That is what is lovely about fill flash.

The challenge with Rohirrim's original image is that there is little separation between the white background and the foreground. That makes it near impossible to use fill flash because nearly the same amount of light that hits your subject also hits the background. That's why I suggested the only real options are to blow highlights in the background or post process the foreground.

In your pictures, you have a nice distance separation between foreground and background so fill flash can work wonders. That distance allows the light to fall off significantly before it hits the background so that the flash is really only illuminating the foreground.

So, to summarize, I like pathfinder's ideas. If you can get some distance separation between your subject and the background, then fill flash is the perfect answer. But, if you can't, then you'll have to post process or blow highlights in the background.

pathfinder

Very good point, John, I should have been more aware of the proximity of the snowy backround to the RR's bird as you pointed out. It would be hard to fill flash his image without compromising the snow - I agree.

Rohirrim

pathfinder wrote:

Very good point, John, I should have been more aware of the proximity of the snowy backround to the RR's bird as you pointed out. It would be hard to fill flash his image without compromising the snow - I agree.

Thank you again both John and Path, I think I'm starting to understand this whole thing. I worked up the image in post as per Johns suggestions with a little LAB to try and bring out the colors.

Before:


After

• Adjusting Curves to lighten up the darks
• Added second curves layer in multiply, then masked the bird out to take the glare out of the snow a bit, adjusted opacity of layer.
• Then switched to LAB 20% increase in AB channels to bring out color.
• Sharpened L channel with selective sharpening to bird

How'd I do?

pathfinder

I think that is much better!!

If it were me, I might have painted a better catchlight in the eye too.

I know that some feel that borders on sacriledge. But I am not a court reporter, but a photgraphic naturalist.

jfriend

Might consider plain curve with no masks

Rohirrim wrote:

Thank you again both John and Path, I think I'm starting to understand this whole thing. I worked up the image in post as per Johns suggestions with a little LAB to try and bring out the colors.

After

• Adjusting Curves to lighten up the darks
• Added second curves layer in multiply, then masked the bird out to take the glare out of the snow a bit, adjusted opacity of layer.
• Then switched to LAB 20% increase in AB channels to bring out color.
• Sharpened L channel with selective sharpening to bird

How'd I do?

This one is lots better. I like it.

One thing you might want to think about in the future is that you can probably manipulate this image nearly any way you want with a curve only, no need for a mask. The reason you can do that here is that the bird and snow are in completely different parts of the histogram. When that's true and there's a gap between them, you can create a curve that has one effect on the bird and another affect on the snow without ever creating a mask. While a mask for this image isn't hard to create, I first try to find ways to accomplish what I want without a mask because it's usually easier without a mask and masks and can easily show mistakes if not done perfectly.

Anyway, in this image, the histogram looks like this before correction:


The peak on the right is the snow. The small hill on the left of the histogram is the bird. The flat spot in between is basically nothing. That means we can make a curve that raises the tones of the bird, then during the flat spot in between gets back into position for the snow and then does whatever we want to on the snow.

So, with no masks, I used this curve in RGB (but set to luminosity blend mode):


To produce this image:


In a nutshell, this curve is substantially raising the brightness of the bird while adding some contrast to the snow. You can actually achieve almost any effect you want on the snow by simply changing the right end of the curve - all without affecting the bird. In fact, you can drop the right end of the curve like this:


And get this effect on the snow without any change to the bird:


As with many things in Photoshop, there are many ways to achieve a goal, none are more "right" than others. This image was such a poster child for manipulation with a curve that I thought I'd point out this technique instead of masks.

Rohirrim

Thanks again John, I've learned a ton from this topic