I Bracket Exposures, Too!

By John Gerlach

Common tern, Shetland Islands, Scotland, by Barbara Gerlach. Nikon F4, Nikon 500mm F4 lens. Fujichrome Velvia. Metered neutral and subtracted one-half stop of light, so I would not overexpose the white in the bird.

Those readers who have attended my nature photography seminars and workshops might be surprised by the title of this article, because I always preached shooting exposures right on the money. I still believe that relying on bracketing to achieve the exposure you want is not the best way to work and generally is a waste of film plus added expense. But sometimes it's necessary. Before considering those situations where I find selective bracketing essential, let's define bracketing exposures.

Bracketing means to take several different exposures of the same subject to insure you get at least one frame that is the exposure you desire. For example, suppose you metered a white-tailed deer and got a reading off the gray fur of 1/125 second at f/8. A photographer who brackets would shoot that exposure and then perhaps add one-half stop more light by shooting at 1/125 second at f/6.3 and subtract one-half stop of light by shooting at 1/125 second at the midpoint between f/8 and f/11. Some photographers bracket exposures in full stop intervals. Shooting a range of exposures in this way does increase your chances of getting the exposure you want. That's why so many photographers rely on bracketing rather than mastering exposure. It's an effective method for getting at least a few well-exposed frames.

I suspect that I wouldn't have learned to control exposure had my photo career taken me in a different direction. If I had pursued shooting lots of magazine photo essays, I would probably have relied on bracketing since I only needed a frame or two of each shot to come out properly exposed to show the editors. The bad exposures created as a result of bracketing would have been discarded. Instead, I pursued making a living in nature photography by acquiring stock photo agencies around the world and filling their files with as many quality photos as I could.

Red-throated loon, Shetland Islands, Scotland, by John Gerlach. Nikon F4, 500mm F4 lens. Fujichrome Velvia. Spot metered some neutral vegetation along the far shore and made no compensation.

In the beginning, I only had a few agencies, but now Barbara and I have about twenty different ones between us. Since my contracts with agencies are on a nonexclusive basis only, I am free to submit similar photos to all of my agencies. This means that every time I take a photograph, I actually need to take fifteen to twenty in-camera originals so I can have at least one frame to send to each of my agencies and a few for my personal files. Obviously, relying on bracketing when you need that many well-exposed originals would be a terrific expense. Of course, even without bracketing, some subjects, like flying or swimming birds, won't let you get that many identical originals even with high speed motor drives, so I just do the best I can when photographing action. With my luck, if I relied on bracketing to photograph wildlife in action, the very best pose would always occur on a poorly exposed bracket, so that's another reason for me not to rely on bracketing. Barbara and I shoot a lot of 4x5 landscape photos. This is another reason we do not rely on bracketing exposures because each frame shot with the large format camera costs about four dollars by the time it is processed. It is difficult to bracket widely when four dollars evaporates from our beleaguered bank account with every shot. Generally, we make four exposures that we think are right on the money. If the scene is somewhat difficult or high in contrast, we may bracket by shooting two more frames at one-half stop more light or less light, depending on the situation. Finally, I have never been a big fan of bracketing because I like to learn how to do things precisely. Perhaps this need for precision is a carryover from my college training in physics and chemistry. Whatever the reason, it's just not in my nature to do things in a haphazard way. I have always avoided allowing chance to play a significant role in anything that I deem important. I just edited over 200 rolls of 35mm film that I shot on my August safari to Kenya and only bracketed two situations during the whole trip. Fortunately, I had no problems with exposure at all. But, there were two places where I found bracketing to be necessary. I bracket slightly when photographing sunsets and sunrises. Both my Nikon F4 and Canon EOS-1 camera bodies can bracket in one-third stop shutter speeds or F-stops so I always use one-third stop intervals. In the case of a sunset or sunrise with few clouds, I meter the red sky and add plus one stop of light and then slightly bracket by shooting a few more frames at only plus two-thirds stops of light. However, if lots of clouds are present, I use a different strategy to avoid having the clouds come out too dark on the film. I still spot meter only the red sky and shoot some exposures by adding plus one stop of light. Then I bracket by shooting some frames at plus one and one-third stops of light, and I don't shoot any frames at plus two-thirds stops of light. Usually all of the exposures produce keeper images, but I will probably like one of the exposures somewhat better than the others so I'll keep those for my files.

Gerenuk Feeding, Samburu National Park, Kenya, Africa, by John Gerlach. Canon EOS-1, Canon 35-350mm zoom lens. Fujichrome Provia 100. Beanbag from safari vehivle. Spot metered the gerenuk which is pretty neutral and made no compensation.

Shooting masses of hippos basking in early morning sun with my Canon 90mm tilt and shift lens also demanded some bracketing. I was getting shine off the skin of the wet hippos, making them brighter than neutral which could cause underexposure. Also, tilt and shift lenses seem to throw off my camera meter. It seems the more I tilt the lens, the further off my meter becomes toward underexposure. Since both of these factors could cause underexposure, I knew I should bracket toward more light just in case. So I metered the hippos and shot some frames at the camera reading. Then I bracketed by adding one-third stop of light and I even shot a few frames by adding a full two-thirds stops of light to the initial reading off the hippos. A careful review of the film on my light table showed that adding plus one-third stop of light to the hippos produced the best exposure.

Another place where I found selective bracketing to be necessary was in the slot canyons near Page, Arizona. During the middle of a sunny day, sunlight bounces off the walls in the slot canyons illuminating the wall in fascinating ways. While incredibly beautiful, the scene is typically rather high in contrast, making it difficult to record on film. To figure my exposure, I just metered the brightest sunlit wall. I figured the illuminated wall was somewhat brighter than neutral so I thought one-half stop more exposure would be needed to properly record the wall. But I also had a lot of shadows and dimmer light on other walls in my photo so I thought that perhaps I should overexpose my brightest wall slightly just to pick up more details in some of the darker walls. Since I was trying to get the best overall exposure of the whole scene and could tolerate some of the wall being slightly overexposed, I decided to meter the brightest wall and add two-thirds stops of light. I bracketed by shooting some additional frames and adding one full stop of light off the brightest wall. The photos resulting from both of these exposures were just fine for me and my clients. I have found other places where some slight bracketing may be necessary. Anytime you use long exposures where film reciprocity failure is a factor is a good time to bracket toward more light since reciprocity failure costs you light. Backlit subjects is another time for some slight bracketing due to the inherent contrast of most backlit scenes. And when you have something really special that's not moving, go ahead and bracket somewhat just to be sure. Finally, since I conduct instructional seminars on nature photography, I occasionally have to photograph some of my equipment to use in slide programs. Even though I know that I can meter my black Canon EOS-1 and subtract one stop of light to get a pretty good exposure, I still bracket in one-third stop intervals over a range of plus and minus two-thirds stops of light just to make sure I don't have to set the equipment back up and rephotograph it. There are few things in life more boring than photographing camera gear! Some photographers have pointed out that everyone should bracket their exposures all the time, because there are so many variables. For example, your shutter speeds may be off slightly, causing perhaps a one-third stop overexposure. The film processor might leave the film in the first developer too long, causing another one-third stop overexposure. And even the film might not actually have the same speed as the number on the box. They say a film that has a listed ISO speed of fifty might actually be ISO sixty-four which would cause another one-third stop of overexposure. It's true these variables exist, but I have never had a significant problem with any of these potential difficulties and have long ago stopped worrying about them. I've learned that life is a lot easier if I don't fret about situations that never happen. I believe there are times when the intelligent use of bracketing exposures is wise and even necessary. But, I still believe it's a worthwhile goal to master exposure so bracketing usually isn't necessary. Exposure is a skill that can be easily learned by anyone, and once exposure is conquered, then the photographer can concentrate on the real art of nature photography, which is finding photogenic subjects, creating strong compositions, and seeing the light. John and Barbara Gerlach travel extensively to photograph new stock images for their network of photo agencies. Travel destinations include such exotic locations as Antarctica, the Arctic, the Galapagos, and Africa. John's photographs have been published in every major nature magazine, including National Wildlife, Sierra, Natural History, Audubon, Backpacker, Popular Photography, Petersen's Photographic, Shutterbug's Outdoor & Nature Photography, and Outdoor Photographer. Barbara's credits include International Wildlife, Birder's World, Outdoor Photographer, and Nature Photographer, among others. Both of their images have appeared in calendars, including Sierra calendars and Audubon calendars. Their images are also frequently used by book publishers. Copyright, Nature Photographer Magazine 1996. To find out more about Nature Photographer Magazine click here.