Sometimes you find yourself in a lighting situation that demands a bit more than 'average metering'.  Take the image below for example. The foreground of image 1 was in heavy shadow, while the mountainside was being lit by a strong band of sunlight. If one points the camera at the scene and relies on average metering the result will be washed highlights on both the mountain and in the sky . . .

Image 1

Seeing that we've lost detail in the mountains and sky, we need to compensate for the problem. Among your options are spot-metering off the well-lit portions of the mountain, or manually underexposing by anything from say half a stop under, to one and a half stops under. If we do this, the result is likely to look like image 2 . . .

Image 2

Now I have what looks like the correct exposure, and I personally find it pleasing. The tonal range among the highlights is just right, but perhaps a little dense in the shadow areas. In ye olde days of film of slides that would be that, but in this digital age we can play with the shadows a little bit.

Unfortunately however, the trend nowadays is to take the 'correction' process a little too far when using PhotoShop's shadow/highlight, as it is being used for exposure correction. Search the web and you'll find such images similar to image 3 below on which I have intentionally applied the overuse of shadow/highlight . . . i.e. I have used the shadow feature to lighten the dark areas of the image. I've overdone it obviously.

Image 3

I may be treading on many toes here, but this is a common mistake, and the result is a 'wishy-washy' image with flat tonal values. No longer is there a good black in the image, plus the greens amid the trees at left look extremely unnatural. HDR can give you the same unwanted effect, if we allow it to, but that can be remedied by un-checking the one image that's causing the issue.

So what is a good balance in terms of exposure and manipulation? I believe it to be image 4 below. It was exposed at the same settings as image 2, but with just a moderate and appropriate amount of shadow adjustment applied to the image. First though, lets look at image 2 once more for a direct comparison, then image 4 . . .

Image 2 [repeated]

Image 4

As the foreground was in shade I feel that it should remain so, but benefit from a subtle use of the 'shadow' option in PhotoShop. Consequently, in my opinion that is, image 4 represents the ideal exposure for this and other mountainous situations.

Remember that whatever you shoot, the final result is only limited by your imagination. Good shooting!

John Baker, Travel Images
All images and text are strictly copyrighted by John Baker Photographer LLC/Travel Images, 1990-2012. Permission in writing must be sought for any form of reproduction.

Do you have questions or comments about 'Practical Photo Insights'? To share your thoughts or suggest a photography subject you'd like to see addressed, please E-mail me.

You're also welcome to submit images for critique, which run the risk of being used as a Practical Photo Insights topic!

Back to the Photo Insights index