Hot answers tagged brightness
7
What you are probably looking for is a 10-stop ND filter. Lee and Hitech make large square filters - Lee calls theirs the "big stopper". B+W make a screw-in version that is less expensive.
These will roughly allow for 1000 times the exposure. So instead of 1/250th of a second, you can expose for 1000 * 1/250 = 4 seconds.
If you want even longer ...
5
Things look different because everything is different and you have done no effort to make them the same. Your DSLR has control over brightness and so does your screen and your friend's, etc. The probability of them being at the same brightness without you doing explicitly so is absolutely zero.
A JPEG image and RAW file is different. As a matter, a RAW ...
5
You are missing the point of manual mode. Unlike the automatic or semi-automatic modes, it is up to you to change the settings to get the exposure you want in any given scene. That's why it's called manual mode. The light varies, therefore so will the camera settings.
It is impossible to permanently 'set the cursor to 0' unless you live in a windowless box ...
4
A back-of-camera LCD is not designed, and should not be used, for gauging exposure based on the brightness of the LCD. As noted by Dreamager in a comment, you can adjust the brightness of the LCD and that might better approximate how things look on your computer. Whether or not your computer is displaying an image accurately depends on if it's been ...
4
Well, sort of. Think about the sun shining through a lens — it's immediately apparent that the focused spot of light is brighter than the unfocused.
However, the catch is that your "real view" also goes through a lens which focuses the light: your eye. So, in a sense, the real comparison is simply "Is there a lens which is brighter than the human eye?" — ...
4
You need an ND filter to get long exposures in daylight as others have noted.
However this will probably still not give you the results you need. Long exposure shots of cars work at night time because the car head/tail lights are brighter than anything else in the scene.
During the day all you will get with a long exposure shot of cars going by is a muddy ...
3
You have to limit incoming light even more, since it is daylight.
You can achieve this by stacking (putting on) multiple Natural Density filters. You might try to get Cokin or Lee filter holders and buy extra set with couple ND filters and try how many filters you have to use to stop enough light. Those filters comes as ND2, ND4 etc... depending on how much ...
3
The most likely reason is the relative brightness of your camera LCD and your computer
screen.
I wouldn't judge if the image is bright just because it looks bright in the LCD. I would
instead use the histogram - start by taking a well-exposed image where you have a histogram that indicates the image is not too dark and not too bright. I would turn off ...
3
Before you get too panicky, there are a couple of things to keep in mind. The first is, as suggested already, you may have missed a setting (exposure compensation). That may not be the problem, though, since you're only experiencing the problem in very bright conditions.
That brings us to the second: to an extent, the camera is supposed to do this in Auto. ...
2
That is it. Just apply a multiplication factor and not an offset to preserve colors.
If you are not concerned with how bright the image has to be then, that is all there is.
If you are, then you need to know if your image data is linear, logarithmic or follows a gamma curve. That depends on the image format but most scientific data is stored linearly.
1
As mentioned, you would need to consider using an ND filter. The LEE big stopper is a well respected filter and should give the results you are looking for.
Here is a link to the Lee Website
The cokin ND filters are known to give a magenta colour cast when used, which, unless you like that effect on a specific image, you would have to fix in post ...
1
Theoretically, yes. The human eye reportedly only opens as far as f/3.2, and there are many lenses faster than this. The Canon 50mm f/1.0 for example was marketed as being "faster than the human eye", although the f/3.2 figure suggests it shares that award with most prime lenses.
The biggest obstacle is designing a reflex mirror, pentaprism and focus screen ...
1
I'd like to disagree with the other answers - we'll maybe just question them.
Take your magnifying idea. You are not making the sun brighter! You are just focusing the caught by the lens into a small point, making it appear brighter.
Light gets "lost" through every surface it passes through or bounces off of. You may change the appearance of it's ...
1
This should be possible since the eye samples light from a relatively small surface area where as a lens samples light from a much larger area. The bigger problem is the huge discrepancy between the sensitivity of the eye and the sensitivity of sensors. I can already take photos with my Canon 5D Mark iii with fairly short shutters (sub 1/3 second, ...
1
Your camera is probably doing fine.
If the RAW looks as good as the JPEG when you brighten it up, then everything is fine. You can use exposure compensation to get more information into the RAW. Set the JPEG picture settings to neutral to get a true representation of the data you are capturing. Vibrant looks nicer on the camera but does not give you a real ...
1
This is general comment - not D5100 specific
I assume that the exposure is NOT locked for all of the sequence but can vary. As light level changes. This may be an option. You need to be able to allow exposure to change - ie an auto setting.
You may need to experiment with spot / centre / wide exposure settings. Depending on which of these you use the ...
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible
