Understanding Exposure

[expensive_hobby]

Woohooo baby! You guys (and gals... are there any gals here besides me?) are DA BOMB!

Check out my pics from vacation. Okay, they may not be all that to all of you, but I was happy to have had a much better understanding to what I was doing. A few I'm not sure what I did wrong. And then there's one really bad one in which I know what I did wrong. lol

The dockyard- for the life of me I cannot recall what the three different areas said. I picked two and this was the better of them:
1/400; 11; 100; WB: Auto


Here's the one I know what I did wrong. lol I never captured a reading off of the roof. Doh!
1/400; 10; 100; daylight


The one my children think is from the Little Mermaid was quite a challenge. I'm actually impressed with it. I only took one since it was for one of them. And I was really anticipating it coming out bad-- horribly bad.
1/640; 8.0; 100; daylight

I'll post the one that I'm confused over separately.

And don't mind the lint, hair or whatever it is. It's definitely inside because it appears no matter what lens I use. I've done everything trying to get it out except the vaccum-- which could be next.

[expensive_hobby]

Okay here's the one I'm not totally sure where I went wrong. In hindsight I should have *chimped* and probably have done one more either changing the aperture or shutter speed. But which is the better to adjust yielding a somewhat more predictable result? I'm thinking aperture. But then I think... well, probably either.

1/320; 10.0; 100; Auto.


I really should have written down the different readings, but I wasn't really anticipating a really bad one like this.

[KellyL]

I am very happy that you found our thread of use. Good exposures. On your last shot, you kept the blue sky and had the dark backlit building. What are you going to do? You could have opened up one more stop and accepted a whiter sky and the building would have been more in range.

Glad you found use in the thread! Wish I could have gone with you!

[KellyL]

I had to post this, mostly for Kirk, because I metered the background, settled on one, used a Whibal card AND put my Metz 45CL-4 in MANUAL and took this shot of one of our seniors on senior night. THIS is why I started this thread. For me...the exposure is just fine.

[KellyL]

Except for the white balance, that picture is right out of the camera. I have grown a little.

[harryd]

Kelly it looks wonderful, I am still not able to do anything like that. Just out of curiosity could you tell us the settings you used for this shot, maybe it would help me get the concept through my thick head.

[jfrancho]

Originally Posted by KellyL

I had to post this, mostly for Kirk, because I metered the background, settled on one, used a Whibal card AND put my Metz 45CL-4 in MANUAL and took this shot of one of our seniors on senior night. THIS is why I started this thread. For me...the exposure is just fine.

The field lighting made for a great rim light which really separates them from the BG. Nice job Kelly.

[jfrancho]

Originally Posted by expensive_hobby

Okay here's the one I'm not totally sure where I went wrong. In hindsight I should have *chimped* and probably have done one more either changing the aperture or shutter speed. But which is the better to adjust yielding a somewhat more predictable result? I'm thinking aperture. But then I think... well, probably either.

1/320; 10.0; 100; Auto.


I really should have written down the different readings, but I wasn't really anticipating a really bad one like this.

Nothing went wrong here, the sky is properly exposed, and the brightest element in the frame. The fact that the cliff is dark is really a limitation of the dynamic range the camera can capture. The simplest solution is to use some controlled dodge during processing, as shown in this video: http://www.thelightsrightstudio.com/...derControl.mov.

[Tom Swaman]

Now we have generated 12 pages of valuable information, food for thought and opinions, how about a list of current, high quality references on the subject of determining and controlling proper exposure for digital photography?? Your suggestions on reference material, please.....

Thanks,
Tom

[jfrancho]

high quality references on the subject of determining and controlling proper exposure

user manual for your camera

[heartseye]

Originally Posted by jfrancho

user manual for your camera

of course.....you have to actually READ it.....

[jfrancho]

Crap, that rules me out then.

[Tom Swaman]

.....and for those who prefer a separate light meter??

Tom

[peterst6906]

Originally Posted by jfrancho

user manual for your camera

Of course, Nikon aren't really known for either the high quality or readability of their manuals. So if we are relying on that, it's no wonder exposure is a lottery for some people...

[Tom Swaman]

Nikon Manuals?? Canon Manuala?? Manually reading Manuals?? I am looking for references that do not require me to be skilled at reading Thai.

Tom

[cyclohexane]

Hahahahaha

Yeah, most of the camera manuals I've read, except for this old, old Nikon FG manual, have been nearly useless.

[jfrancho]

Must be Canon gets this right. It clearly describes the EV indicator, shutter speed dial, and aperture dial.

[cyclohexane]

Eh, I've read plenty of Canon manuals too, and they're not significantly better than Nikon's.... at least in my opinion.

[kgphoto]

Hey Kelly,

The picture looks good. I told you it was easy.

Now have you done the calibration and circle test I described earlier?

Tom Swaman

Read:

The Upton and Upton Book on Photography for the background and Skin by Lee Varis to convert to digital.

[Brooks]

Originally Posted by kgphoto

Hey Kelly,
Now have you done the calibration and circle test I described earlier?.

Good question, KG!

Has anyone done the dynamic range/exposure tests mentioned way back in the early part of this thread? Has anyone tested for the actual ISO of their sensor? Or tested for the calibratiion of their camera meter and/or hand-held meter?

This is simple stuff which will make a real difference in your photography.