Light up the foreground in this shot without ruining the colors in the sky? Any inputs would be great, thanks!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/56744976@N02/5253032810/

 

In a picture like that, you're pretty SOL.

The foreground is so incredible dark, that the detail is just not going to be there in the picture file itself. You can crank of the exposure or increase fill light in photoshop all day but you're probably not going to get much of anything.

 

You're not going to be able to with software. There's not enough detail to bring it out and what you could bring out will have so much noise it in. You have to start with a good image first. Not saying this is bad, I kinda like the silhouette. But a bad image to start with if you want exposure in the foreground.

To get the image you want, you'll have to take the image with graduated neutral density filters. Or you can bracket to go HDR.

 

If you shot RAW there might be some data the sensor picked up that you could bring back in LR or PS by bumping up the shadow/dark levels.
It'll probably be crap, if anything.

Just tell everyone you were going for a silhouette shot and call it a day

 

Damn....... Well, if I encounter this sort of lighting condition again, what can I do to make the foreground brighter? Flash? I have a SB-600, equipment is D7000 with 35mm 1.8 prime + Bogen/Manfrotto cheapy tripod.

 

And BTW I actually had the perfect lighting, but by the time i set everything up, foreground got dark.......

 

I wasn't shooting RAW
I suppose I can tell people I was going for a silhouette shot lol

 

Expose for the foreground and let the sky detail blow out and vice versa and combine the two exposures in Photoshop

 

I am gonna try that if I happen to be home when that kind of lighting comes again. Now to find me a copy of CS lol.

 

I'm thinking bout getting the Tokina 11-16 f/2.8, Nikkor 24mm f/2.8, and Nikkor 50mm f/1.8, instead of buying the Nikkor 17-55 f/2.8 lol.
The way I see it is, I can have the Tokina + 2 more Nikkor primes new for like..... 800 bucks? Rather than paying $1000 for a used 17-55mm lol.

 

You should be able to find a 17-55 for about $800/$850, I know there's two of the on the local c/l's as of today.


The 11-16 is a great little lens, the others are good as well. I would add for you to think about the new 35mm 1.8 as well, brand new about $190. I rather have that over the 50mm on a cropped body. Unless you plan on using the 50mm as a portrait lens.

 

dude...... I shot that picture with a 35mm 1.8 prime, it's BEEN in my arsenal, lol.

 

And, unfortunately, I live in LA. the land of "everyone want more money for their used lens", so the cheapest I've found for Nikkor 17-50 2.8 is around 950 or more.
Basically I want thr Tokina for those wide angle shots, and 24 + 50 for when there is no way I can take a few steps back or forward with my 35mm lol.

 

Besides the 50 1.8 can be had for around 120 bucks, what's not to like bout it lol

 

I have the 50mm 1.8D and love it.

 

Quick question. Why don't you shoot in RAW all the time. Even you really want Jpeg images for fast review, you can just write to one card in RAW and the other in Jpeg. I have my D7000 setup to shoot RAW to card 1 and video to CARD 2, since I don't mind converting everything later. It gives me a lot more flexibility.

 

The only way I can see to get what you want with that picture would be to do a High Dynamic Range shot but that would require some software to combine the different exposures. It certainly will give you the look you want. Photomatix makes a good HDR program/plug-in but it's about $100. Also, like others have said, definitely shoot RAW so you can make adjustments later much easier.

BTW, I have both the Tokina 11-16 and the Nikon 17-55 2.8. The Nikon is my everyday/do everything lens for my D7000 and is fast and sharp but heavy. It's image quality is excellent and its range is perfect. I find it's on my D7000 about 90% of the time. I love the Tokina too as it's very sharp and has that "snap" usually only found in more expensive prime lenses. There's some distortion on the edges (as expected in such a wide angle lens) and the zoom range is so limited that I treat it like a prime. I also have the Nikon 35 1.8 and the Nikon 80-200 2.8. I'm thinking of getting the Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR1 if I can find a good used price. The VRII is just too expensive.

 

It's because I don't do post processing at the moment, still looking for a copy of CS2.... So if I am not doing post processing, I just shoot good old JPEG lol.

 

I thought about getting a 17-55, but it's just too big and heavy for my lazy ass to carry it all day lol.
So I'm gonna get the smaller Tokina 11-16 for rolling shots of people's cars. 35mm 1.8 for walking around, and 50mm when I need to zoom in lol.
The 35mm is on my camera most of the time even when I had other lenses. It's a great lens and only cost 200 bucks, I love it!

 

Besides I can get the Tokina and the 50mm new for less than the price of a used 17-55 lol.

 

77mm Hoya UV filter? Wonder what it could be for?


Hmmmmmm, Tokina eh?


Ta da! My new Tokina 16-50 f/2.8!








And mounted on camera:




:applause2: I like it so far, well build, heavy lens!
AF feels just as fast as the Nikkor 17-55 f/2.8 I tried out in the store, build quality is also on par with the Nikkor. Images are soft at the corners @16 f/2.8, but super sharp @ f/4. All the other ranges are sharp all around @ f/2.8.