Underexposed= I needed to Up the ISO?

Questions on editing, camera settings, equipment, critiques, how to upload photos, etc....
TrainWatcher
The Beast
Posts: 5934
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 1:28 pm

Underexposed= I needed to Up the ISO?

Unread post by TrainWatcher »

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreject. ... 5231&key=0

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreject. ... 5227&key=0

Got dual rejections for "Underexposed". This was my 2nd time working with timed exposre shots with my Canon SX130IS. I shot these at 1 Second exposure, F Stop was at 8, and ISO was 100.

User avatar
conrailmike
Signal Maintainer
Posts: 2832
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 9:59 pm
Location: Less than 100' from CSX (LSRC) Saginaw Sub. MP 61.4 in Highland, MI

Re: Underexposed= I needed to Up the ISO?

Unread post by conrailmike »

Yep, they look underexposed. You could've upped your ISO or left the shutter open a lot longer than 1 second. Come on now, this is photography 101 stuff you should know if you're attempting night shots.

User avatar
Y@
Ass. Janitor
Posts: 5588
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 7:37 pm

Re: Underexposed= I needed to Up the ISO?

Unread post by Y@ »

What Mike said.

Plus, what in the hell are those hexagon shaped things in the upper right? Sorry James, you could have (and should have) done much better.
Bottom text.

User avatar
conrailmike
Signal Maintainer
Posts: 2832
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 9:59 pm
Location: Less than 100' from CSX (LSRC) Saginaw Sub. MP 61.4 in Highland, MI

Re: Underexposed= I needed to Up the ISO?

Unread post by conrailmike »

Y@ wrote: Plus, what in the hell are those hexagon shaped things in the upper right?
Lens flare

mlmphotography
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 208
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 4:45 pm
Contact:

Re: Underexposed= I needed to Up the ISO?

Unread post by mlmphotography »

ISO 100 is where you need to be on that camera for most night shots, so I'd suggest opening up the aperture to f4 - f6.3, and try longer exposures.

Successful shots at night require knowledge, trial and error testing, and some luck. I think these two examples looked fine on the preview screen of the camera, and you went with it. Always pull the histrogram and check it, because LCD's in darkness lie to you.

Better luck next time!

Loyd L.

TrainWatcher
The Beast
Posts: 5934
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 1:28 pm

Re: Underexposed= I needed to Up the ISO?

Unread post by TrainWatcher »

Thanks Loyd. It was a trial and error, and I guess I will mess with my F Stop next time I go to shoot at night.

User avatar
MDH
rp.net addict
Posts: 2687
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 3:30 pm
Location: Toledo, OH

Re: Underexposed= I needed to Up the ISO?

Unread post by MDH »

conrailmike wrote:Lens flare
Definitely - and that can be a real #$%&. If at all possible I try to take multiple compositions even at slightly different angles because even with checking test shots it's easy to miss lens flare, especially the more different light sources you have.

As to the exposure - the advice already given is good. Those two are WAY under-exposed and you should keep the ISO at 100 to avoid noise but don't be afraid to open it up a little more down to say f5.6 or so and try longer, even *much* longer exposure times. For example, I think this was about 5 seconds at f5.6 / ISO 100 even with all the ambient station lighting:

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=353183

In yours, it doesn't look like you have much in the way of light hitting the subject so you need either a really long exposure of some additional light. That may be a real problem in the first one with the interior lights showing in the building because a longer exposure would seriously blow those out.

That's the great thing about digital though - cheap to learn! Go out and try a whole bunch on some stationary subject (doesn't even need to be a train) to get a feel for how this stuff works.

Good luck,
Michael
Michael Harding
P&WV fan in HO

Post Reply