Bracketing in the digital age

Growth rarely seems to be one single epiphany, rarely a situation where one is suddenly faced with a new reality and yells, “AHA”!!! Archimedes notwithstanding, I think artistic growth is more often a series of small steps that delivers us to a new way of looking at our world.

When I was a beginning photographer, I would bracket (making multiple exposures at different camera settings) extensively, hoping desperately that at least one exposure would correctly translate my vision onto film. My wastebasket overflowed, but I learned eventually how to create a “good” exposure. (As long as I could remember which settings I had used for each image). As my skills increased, I found myself looking with disdain at the process of bracketing, seeing it as a sign of a shooter not really confident in his or her understanding of light and exposure. It was a great source of satisfaction to “nail” an exposure and having the confidence not to bracket. Seems pretty shallow in retrospect, eh?

Interesting that now as a digital photographer, I find myself bracketing probably more than ever. I no longer bracket for general exposure, the histogram having pretty much eliminated that worry. I do bracket for very specific exposure, such as the images I placed on the blog previously, in which the color range could not be captured with one exposure. I also bracket for dynamic range, where image contrast far exceeds what I can capture with one exposure. I also bracket for depth-of-field, using layer masks in Photoshop to blend images together in order to increase apparent depth-of-field. And of course, I bracket composition, often choosing my favorite image after the fact, on the computer screen.

“What goes around…”

P.S. The attached image has nothing to do with bracketing. I'm just having trouble letting go of summer. Sorry.

The End of Summer...

The second official day of autumn and I couldn't sleep, not ready for summer to end. In a futile attempt to hold it back, I share the above haiku/photograph combination, which is actually a late summer haiku, according to haiku master and friend Bill Higginson, who is responsible for the original translation of the Japanese poem as part of the Butterfly Dreams project.
The truth is, all things end. All we can do is hope for spring.

Color Problems: Part 3

I then take a second exposure, using values that bring the red histogram back within reasonable range. I say reasonable because there may be spikes of red and yellow which are simply NOT capture-able (is that a word?) by your sensor. This looks like a pretty under-exposed image on the LCD, but I take it anyway.

When both images are opened in Camera Raw (or whatever software you use), there is visible detail in the darker one within the areas of red that were blown out on the original exposure. When I blend those two together, I have one image which maintains detail throughout.

Color Problems: Part 2

So here is the original image. Again, the luminance histogram (the black-and-white one) tells me that the exposure is just fine. Experience tells me, however, that red is n easy color to overexpose, and I check the RGB histogram. Imagine my (lack of) surprise when it shows me that the red channel is way blown out!

I take my first exposure based on the luminance histogram, and you can see above the areas of red next to and in front of the Japanese beetle that have no detail whatsoever.

Just Playing...

"A DIFFERENT DRUMMER..."

"this way and that

this frog’s cousins

and second cousins"

Issa

translation © 2006 William J. Higginson


In the 1960s and 70s, the underside of every palmetto leaf in the Florida Everglades seemed to host its own resident family of green tree frogs (Hyla cinerea). Sadly, in many areas, this is no longer the case. If the frog is indeed our “canary in the coal mine”, we are in deep trouble.

The lighting here is a bit harsh, (see the shadows under the leaf rib, for instance), as this image was shot long before the days of TTL fill flash with a manual Sunpack 444 on 1/8 power. (In those days, I was using a 105mm Noflexar on the Novoflex Auto Bellows). The manual flash caused the “hot spot” on the hind leg of the larger frog, a common problem when shooting wet subjects. If I were to re-shoot this today, I would use either fill flash, polarized flash, a diffuser or some combination of the preceding techniques.

Field Theory and Perspective in the Context of Katydids: Part Two

Again, I began the process of "composition repair" by taking the camera off the tripod and moving around the subject. Fortunately, this event occurred in the evening and the slightly cool katydid was fairly calm and satisfied just to keep an eye on me as I worked. I had noticed in the background of the previous photograph a small blotch of yellow that turned out to be a patch of sunflowers in another part of the garden. I chose an angle that separated the katydid from the leaf, and a position that used the out-of-focus yellow sunflowers as my background. Much more pleasing, aesthetically, I think. A shallow depth-of-field (notice the repeating theme?) separates the katydid from its background, but I was not totally successful in paralleling the camera plane with the subject plane. (Did anyone notice the missing leg?)

ADDENDUM:
Although the second image is more dramatic and shows off the katydid more effectively, the first photo is not a "bad" shot. If, for instance, I were writing an article on camouflage, I could very well choose that first image as an illustration.

Field Theory and Perspective in the Context of Katydids: Part One

How's that for a convoluted title? Don't fret--all will become clear.

I have been photographing small critters for almost 40 years, and have shown, sold, and taught. One of the more common questions that I'm asked actually has nothing to do with equipment, technique, Photoshop, etc. It goes something like, "how on earth do you see those things?" Aside from the fact that I'm looking for them, there is another process at work below the conscious level that helps me in the field.

I have a friend who was a dedicated hunter. He didn't believe in ambushing from tree stands--he stalked his deer with a bow and arrow, and claims that all he needed was the twitch of an ear or flick of a tail, and the deer was his. He hunts now with a long telephoto lens, but the lessons he learned as a hunter have stood him in good stead in his new persona as a wildlife photographer. What he was doing was identifying field patterns.

When we become really familiar with an environment, we internalize the patterns that it contains. The patterns of branches, leaves, ripples, etc. all become associated in our minds with that environment. Although this is a subconscious process, we can call upon it and bring it into awareness. When I am in the field, my eyes/brain pick out anomalies or variations from the familiar patterns. Subconscious: "Hmmm, the lump on that leaf should not be there as part of the leaf; what is it?" And. there it is--a leaf-green katydid! Or the antenna of a praying mantis, peeking out from behind an identically-colored stalk of grass.

This photograph is an "accurate" one in that it portrays the animal camouflaged in its environment. It is, however, certainly not an aesthetic tour-de-force." How can we fix this? On to Part Two!

Monarch Butterfly Caterpillar (Daneus plexippus)

This monarch butterfly caterpillar is pretty well isolated against its background. It was photographed at f8 and I tried to parallel the sensor plane of the camera with the plane of the caterpillar's body. The choice of d-o-f is always a compromise in macrophotography--too much and backgrounds and foregrounds become distracting. Too little, and parts of the subject that you would like to be sharp are not.

Neither the monarch butterfly nor its caterpillar are subtle in their coloration. In fact, they advertise their identity. They are toxic and/or bad-tasting and are avoided by most birds. Like many caterpillars, the monarch has a set of "horns" both fore and aft, to confuse predators so they will not know which end is which. This gives the caterpillar better odds of surviving an attack.

Spider and Web 1

Yet Another Use for Layer Masks...

We know that depth-of-field decreases as magnification increases, that is, as you move closer to your subject. In this image, I could either have the edge of the flower in focus or the insides of the flower, but not both at the f-stop I had chosen. And I had chosen a shallow depth-of-field because I wanted the background to be just a soft green, with no distracting detail.

Once again, Photoshop to the rescue. I photographed the flower twice, once with the inside sharp and once with the edge sharp. No other settings were changed except for the point of focus. In Photoshop, I brought both images together with a Layer Mask. (I always make the top image the one from which I will be using the most information, in this case the outer flower). I then used the Brush tool to bring out the sharp detail in the center. Note that there will always be a slight change in size, since when you change focus, there will be a change in magnification.

Once again, is this cheating? Or are we simply bringing to the screen the image as our eyes saw it in the field? Your call, but perhaps another reason to learn to use Photoshop's Layer Mask. But remember, this is a technique that needs to be planned for while you are photographing. I have put together as many as four exposures of the same subject to create the image I wished to see.

Fill-flash with Early Morning Light

The sun rises here at about 6:15, and the light is sufficient for focusing at about 6:30 or thereabouts. This is my favorite time for photography. I love the soft, even light, relative lack of wind, and cooperative subjects. Insects are poikilothermic, or cold-blooded. Their activity level rises and falls with the temperature of their surroundings. In the chill of the early morning, they are torpid and slow--posing nicely, just like this beetle. I occasionally use fill-flash in situations like this. Sometimes the lighting can be too flat, and fill-flash can add just a bit of "pop" to the colors without destroying the soft feel of the image.

Layer Masks for Increased Contrast Range II

Here is another photograph which required some manipulation to salvage a full contrast range. If I had exposed for the bee, the leading edge of the flower would have been totally burnt out. On the other hand, if I exposed for the flower, the bee would have been totally black, and without detail.

I used a slightly different technique for this image than for the last one. I made one exposure, taking care to maintain highlight detail. Then, in Photoshop, the RAW image was brought over twice, once correcting for the highlights, and the second time, correcting for shadow detail. These two images were then blended together with a layer mask into one image that maintained detail in both shadows and highlights.

I have found that using a layer mask to blend together almost identical images is an indispensable technique, at least for the type of photography I prefer. I use it to assist with depth-of-field issues as well as contrast range.

Backgrounds to Isolate Your Subjects...

This is the dragonfly image that kept disappearing whenever I would try to post it. Thanks for your patience while I learn how to do this blog thing.

What I Like:

The triangular composition is a very stable one, although its very stability risks making the image seem static and non-living. The background is more mottled, and, to my eyes, more natural than a monotone "posterboard-type" background. And a nice pose.

What I don't like:

I don't care for the abruptness with which the grasses explode out of the base of the frame. If I could do it again, I would try to vignette the bottom of the frame by holding some grasses or leaves close to the front of the lens. I suppose I could do a gradual blur in Photoshop, but I always prefer to "get it right in the camera".

What I like:
The balance of the image. I like how the bud recapitulates the color and position of the butterfly.

Cabbage Butterfly

What I like:
The balance of the image. I like how the bud recapitulates the color and position of the butterfly.

What I don't like:
The image appears almost two-dimensional -- quite flat. I used fill flash and perhaps this has obliterated the texture that gives objects their dimensionality. Background is BORING! Looks almost like poster board. Would selective dodging and burning help?