Nestled in Snow

[Saknika]

Colour Corrected
As Shot

They're the same shot, but one I did some white-balancing for, and the other (sepia-ish) one I didn't touch at all really. Personally, I lean towards the sepia-ish one, but I was always fond of that tinting. The one that won in a poll amongst friends however, was the corrected one.

The shine you see on the lights was created with a star 6 filter that I got for Xmas. It... is one of the best filters EVER. At least to me. x3 I love it so. <3

This is also one of the very few things you will ever see me use a square crop on. I'm just not too fond of them, but I love it here.

So yes, enjoy. <3

AND HAPPY NEW YEAR! \OwO/

[Signore Kai]

I don't really like the crop. It feels extremely tight to me, and I can't really tell what the subject is. At the first, I thought it was a piglet.

I think it's under-exposed as well. Definitely not one of your best, Sak. You can do much better.

[Saknika]

I'm honestly not sure about the exposure. I had to go with the in-camera meter since I left my light meter at home (stupidly), and the histogram checked all right but it might not look it I suppose.

[Pritchard [Epic][Girly Boy]]

That filters wicked.

*wants one*

I personally like the corrected one. Very surreal feeling. Colours are good as well.

Very nice.

[Saknika]

Thank you.

And yeah, it's quickly becoming a favourite filter of mine. I need to find time to use the other one too--a rainbow spot filter. owo

[Alan]

Jan 8, 2009 7:13:55 GMT Saknika said:

I'm honestly not sure about the exposure. I had to go with the in-camera meter since I left my light meter at home (stupidly), and the histogram checked all right but it might not look it I suppose.

It's underexposed because you've metered from those lights.

I'm not really a fan. The "sepia" one looks like (is?) a snapshot that doesn't have the correct white balance, and the corrected one looks very gimmicky to me. You have to use star filters very sparingly; to me this looks like you've made it the focus of the photo.

Have a look at this: humminggirl.deviantart.com/art/Poppy-Star-49030608

[Saknika]

Haha, it's looking to me that this is a shot you either love or hate, with no in between. Personally, I love how the star filter looks in this. I think that's also a personal preference thing, because it is a special effect. And since that was one of the first times I really used it, I'm still learning. I'm sure the shutter speed/aperture will control the size of them, so we'll see.

[firequall]

Jan 8, 2009 7:13:55 GMT Saknika said:

I'm honestly not sure about the exposure. I had to go with the in-camera meter since I left my light meter at home (stupidly), and the histogram checked all right but it might not look it I suppose.

In-camera exposure meters a scene overall (unless set otherwise) and as such, it metered for the lights and the snow rather than just the snow itself. Had the camera metered for just the snow, the lights would have been blown out.

[Saknika]

lol, I know. But blown-out lights aren't always bad if they're controlled. Most lights are actually blown out. But in-camera metering sucks anyways. It was my own stupidity for deciding not to bring the meter. I was planning on doing other photos at the event, so I brought a slave instead... and then the whole thing flopped and I found other things to photograph.

Lesson learned: Forget NOTHING. lol

[Alan]

Jan 9, 2009 3:26:24 GMT Saknika said:

lol, I know. But blown-out lights aren't always bad if they're controlled. Most lights are actually blown out. But in-camera metering sucks anyways. It was my own stupidity for deciding not to bring the meter. I was planning on doing other photos at the event, so I brought a slave instead... and then the whole thing flopped and I found other things to photograph.

Lesson learned: Forget NOTHING. lol

What makes you dislike in camera metering?

[Saknika]

For the past year now I've been working with a Seconic light meter, which allows me to see the light in all different areas and decide how I want to expose it, and what I want to expose for; where as the in camera metering is going to meter for the brightest spot (generally) and that's it.

[Assassinator/Young Everest]

Jan 9, 2009 20:28:52 GMT Saknika said:

For the past year now I've been working with a Seconic light meter, which allows me to see the light in all different areas and decide how I want to expose it, and what I want to expose for; where as the in camera metering is going to meter for the brightest spot (generally) and that's it.

Camera metering does not meter for the brightest spot. It either takes an average of the entire scene and tries to average everything to mid gray and chooses the best exposure that way or it does a center weighted meter. If you get a good enough camera (usually professional level) you can spot meter, which does exactly the same as a handheld meter but more precision as you can aim the 1-2% area you want to take the exposure from, you can even spot meter several different parts of the image and take an average. If you do action/sport/landscape photography than this is more useful as you can't get up and close to the subject. In your case a light meter is good though.

I've been leaning more and more to go manual and just not meter. This is preparing me for when I get a fully manual rangefinder and need to work quick. I find that you can do this in black and white as the film is very forgiving, colour less so. Some of the best photos were taken without light meters, it's very liberating to take complete control of your photos.

Seeing as you were shooting digital for this shot couldn't you of either taken raw or bracketed with jpegs?

[Saknika]

See, I was taught it went for the brightest spot. Huh.

I could have bracketed, and I did shoot raw, but there is only just so much you can do. And I didn't bracket for a very practical reason: it was about -3 degrees F outside with a pretty nasty windchill factor, and I just popped outside briefly for the shot before heading back inside to my hot cocoa where it was warm and we were all sharing in the misery of the failed event. Even with my gloves on, I couldn't feel my hands long enough to take more than two or three photos.

[Assassinator/Young Everest]

Fair enough!
And if the camera always went for and exposured for the brighest spot then metering would always be rubbish....it takes an average of the entire scene. Hence why it's called matix metering, it meters from a matrix and averages it, it doesn't try and keep the brightest part of the image in correct exposure.

[Saknika]

lol, yeah, it makes sense. This just wasn't one of the things I learned at Hallmark. They probably did go over it, but I had a string of days in the beginning that I was out of my mind ODing on anti-depressants, and I probably just don't remember the lesson. Shame on me. But I remember going over it in HS, and apparently it wasn't right. Haha.

[Assassinator/Young Everest]

haha, oh dear, well I've learnt out of several books and internet websites

[Saknika]

Books are good. Someday I might get some, but for now I'm just trying to refind my vision that Hallmark attempted to destroy.