I’m trying to learn how to take high contrast photos, with a long exposure, assuming it’s possible. I know there is a lot wrong with the picture below; the white balance is off and the contrast is drab, I just don’t know how to fix it. As you can see in my exit info: ISO 200 / aperture 22 / exposure 30 sec. The room was dimly lit by two adjoining rooms, no direct light.
I’m hoping that by posting this here, someone with skills will provide me with information on how to do this with a more appealing outcome. Also, if you have an example unedited in your album to post here, I can try to figure out how it differs from my settings, and I will be very grateful :)
Well first let me try to understand what you're trying to do. Are you attempting a high key photo where everything is very overexposed? Or a ghosting long exposure like above?
@jasonbarnette A ghosting long exposure, but is it possible to do that with more contrast than I ended up with? I played with the apeture settings but I ended up with something so over exposed that the image was unrecognizable. I don't necessarily want it to look overexposed, just exposed enough.
Also when I lighted this in post processing, it looks terribly grainy.
OK...I've got it now. Funny...I've been working the last few days uploading a series of self-portraits I took about two to three weeks ago. I've only been uploading two or three a day, but one of the last photos I took was exactly like what you are trying to achieve. So, unfortunately, I don't have the example yet.
However...I can still help you.
The key is your lighting. What you have to figure out is how much light does it take to properly expose something? I know how you want to get yourself in a frame twice, faintly, like a ghost...but that will be tricky.
Think about it. It takes a certain amount of light to properly expose the room you were in. It would take the same exact amount of light to properly expose *you* then. If at 100 ISO and f/22 it takes 30 seconds to properly expose the room, then it would take 30 seconds to properly expose yourself.
But you want more contrast, but not complete, right? So...try this: use the same camera settings, but hold as still as you can for 15 seconds for two different poses. Still, that will only be 50% the exposure you really need.
Do you have a flash? Try this. Use 100 ISO and an f/11. No need for long, 30 second exposures. Try about a 10 second exposure and see how well the room is lit. Once you get the room properly exposed, you'll be ready to try yourself.
Use a flash, but on a very low setting. If you have a separate strobe or built-in flash, try a setting of about 1/64 or 1/28. What you want is just a kiss of light from the flash, just enough to give your pose a boost. With a 10 second overall exposure, you'll be able to spend about 4 seconds each in two different poses. Since that would only be giving you 50% the lighting you would need, the flash will be a subtle supplement.
Did I make sense with all this? If so...give it a try and see what you get. You will have to tinker with the flash to get it just right. Off-camera strobe would be better because you don't want the flash creating a shadow on the wall behind you. But, you could still work with that.
I think the best way to do this would be with a stroboscopic flash, but that will depend on you having flash unit capable of doing that. If not, then you'll have to go with Jason's suggestions. Either that, or Photoshop ;)
@jasonbarnette Good explanation :) When it comes to explaining lights and long exposures and how it all works together, I always found it helpful and enlightening to suggest that people use flashlights and sparklers, or take long exposures of moving traffic. There's something tangible about light painting that really facilitates understanding.
With that said, back to Virginia -- if you you don't have a flash, aim a flashlight at your face! Remember, this will make you expose much quicker, so you might have to do a couple experiments to get it right!
Hey, just wanted to let you know I uploaded the photo I snapped a couple weeks ago that went along the same lines as what you were trying to do. Let me know if this is the affect you wanted and I can help you get your own!
@jasonbarnette@gurry Yes, that was very helpful, thanks a bunch! Unfortunatly, I don't have a seperate flash or strobe light, or a handy built in mechanism within my camera, however I do have a flash light!
I tried the flash light but it didn't work out well, probably the strength of the bulb or something, however I tried using my camera flash with it's lowest setting and that worked very well for one of the images (I was attempting 2 or 3 within one picture) I can see how that would work perfectly for the picture you,Jason, have posted (which is pretty cool by the way) and I will certainly use that info for future pictures. I wanted each of the images to have similar strength and my flash light wasn't cutting it. Gary the link you posted is fantastic, it really makes me want a seperate flash.
Here is what I ended up with, after many shots, for tonight's attempt:
The strange thing is that I ended up using the light from an overhanging lamp instead of my flash, I just turned it on for about a second during each segment of the picture. My flash made the images look much warmer than the lamp bulbs, plus I could flash the same strength of light onto each image. I'm sure this would be perfect if I had a seperate strobe light or some kind of external flash, which I may end up looking into.
Either way, this has been a fun lesson for me and I really appreciate the help.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
Also when I lighted this in post processing, it looks terribly grainy.
However...I can still help you.
The key is your lighting. What you have to figure out is how much light does it take to properly expose something? I know how you want to get yourself in a frame twice, faintly, like a ghost...but that will be tricky.
Think about it. It takes a certain amount of light to properly expose the room you were in. It would take the same exact amount of light to properly expose *you* then. If at 100 ISO and f/22 it takes 30 seconds to properly expose the room, then it would take 30 seconds to properly expose yourself.
But you want more contrast, but not complete, right? So...try this: use the same camera settings, but hold as still as you can for 15 seconds for two different poses. Still, that will only be 50% the exposure you really need.
Do you have a flash? Try this. Use 100 ISO and an f/11. No need for long, 30 second exposures. Try about a 10 second exposure and see how well the room is lit. Once you get the room properly exposed, you'll be ready to try yourself.
Use a flash, but on a very low setting. If you have a separate strobe or built-in flash, try a setting of about 1/64 or 1/28. What you want is just a kiss of light from the flash, just enough to give your pose a boost. With a 10 second overall exposure, you'll be able to spend about 4 seconds each in two different poses. Since that would only be giving you 50% the lighting you would need, the flash will be a subtle supplement.
Did I make sense with all this? If so...give it a try and see what you get. You will have to tinker with the flash to get it just right. Off-camera strobe would be better because you don't want the flash creating a shadow on the wall behind you. But, you could still work with that.
Was this helpful?
Here's a little something on stroboscopic flash. But, even without one, there is still some helpful information about lighting:
http://www.thomaspiteraphotography.com/advanced-techniques/stroboscopic-flash-with-speedlights/
@jasonbarnette Good explanation :) When it comes to explaining lights and long exposures and how it all works together, I always found it helpful and enlightening to suggest that people use flashlights and sparklers, or take long exposures of moving traffic. There's something tangible about light painting that really facilitates understanding.
With that said, back to Virginia -- if you you don't have a flash, aim a flashlight at your face! Remember, this will make you expose much quicker, so you might have to do a couple experiments to get it right!
I tried the flash light but it didn't work out well, probably the strength of the bulb or something, however I tried using my camera flash with it's lowest setting and that worked very well for one of the images (I was attempting 2 or 3 within one picture) I can see how that would work perfectly for the picture you,Jason, have posted (which is pretty cool by the way) and I will certainly use that info for future pictures. I wanted each of the images to have similar strength and my flash light wasn't cutting it. Gary the link you posted is fantastic, it really makes me want a seperate flash.
Here is what I ended up with, after many shots, for tonight's attempt:
The strange thing is that I ended up using the light from an overhanging lamp instead of my flash, I just turned it on for about a second during each segment of the picture. My flash made the images look much warmer than the lamp bulbs, plus I could flash the same strength of light onto each image. I'm sure this would be perfect if I had a seperate strobe light or some kind of external flash, which I may end up looking into.
Either way, this has been a fun lesson for me and I really appreciate the help.
Glad you got some results.