Tue 20-Nov-12 02:47 AM | edited Tue 20-Nov-12 02:53 AM by Bob Chadwick
I was able to shoot a tournament this week, which included the #1 ranked AAAAAA girls basketball team in Georgia (we also have the #1 ranked boys BB team and the #1 ranked football team). I had posted them on my web site and had gotten some feedback that they are too dark and that they lack punch. They seem ok from an exposure perspective on my calibrated monitor at home and at a larger size than is visible on my web site. What do you think and what could I do to improve them?
All were shot with a D800 and Nikon 70-200 in manual mode, except for white balance, at 1/500, f 2.8 and ISO 6400.
#22 is Diamond DeShields, who I have posted about here before. She continues with her involvement on the under 18 Olympic teams, etc. and is one of the #1 candidates on the country. #32 is Shayla Cooper, who is the other Gwinnett County Super Six Players on the team. Gwinnett County is a very competitive county with several of our programs having gotten SI attention as nationally ranked programs.
caveat, I'm looking at these on my non-calibrated work monitor...but they're looking a bit underexposed, except for #3 which is not too far off.
I'd try boosting the Whites and Highlights, and some Shadow too; maybe try bumping Exposure +.15 or .20 initially. I also play w/ the Blacks to deepen it. The first one looks like it could use a contrast boost as well.
I'm usually a lot stingier on the Clarity for images this close to me, like 5 to 10 range.
Chris ===== D300/D3s & more glass than I dare tell the wife
Bob... they are nice shots by the way. I used Photoshop Elements 8 Enhance, Adjust Lighting and used the eye droppers. I picked # 32's hair just above her shoulder for the black point, the back wall just above the railing for the gray point and # 32's uniform a little below her number as the white point.
Tue 20-Nov-12 10:32 PM | edited Tue 20-Nov-12 10:35 PM by Bob Chadwick
Thanks for all the feedback everyone. I'm down in Florida away from the computer and won't get to play with the suggestions until I get back this weekend.
I'm somewhat surprised by the universal comment that they are underexposed. One of the reason that I posted the histograms was to show that they are all on the right side suggesting brighter exposure..
Do you see that BIG empty gap in the histogram where your highlights should be? That's why they look underexposed. The midtones and dark areas show a very full histogram, but all you have on the high side is the very peak whites and then nothing until you get to the upper midtones.
>One of the reason that I posted the histograms >was to show that they are all on the right side suggesting >brighter exposure..
>So what is the goal? To try and get an even spread by >manipulating the sliders?
The goal is to try and get a spread that accurately reflects your scene. If you are shooting a black car against a white wall,you are going to get something very different than shooting a flower in a forest. In the case of athletes in a gym you should have a pretty fair spread of tonality. That gaping hole I the histogram is something that immediately jumped out to me.
Not necessarily. I believe in exposing to maintain as much information in the file as possible. In this instance, the blacks are just at the verge of clipping, and the whites (the actual whites not the lamps) are well preserved. From that perspective, the images is well exposed.
However the images lacks any "punch" because the contrast is too low, the highlights are buried and the blacks are not solid. Saturation is poor due to lack of sufficient lighting as well as shooting at ISO6400. Noise handling may be fairly well controlled there, but several stops of dynamic range are lost by that ISO.
In an environment like this, and with nothing but ambient lighting, our hands are essentially tied. We get what we can get in camera, and then try to recover as much as we can in post.
>Perrone, > >In your response to Bob I gather that you are advising him >that he should expose more to the right in order to minimize >or eliminate any gap on the right end of the histogram. >Correct? > >Bob