Not a bird

Discussion in 'Photography' started by PeterN, Jan 1, 2014.

  1. PeterN

    PeterN Guest

    I have ny recently started using auto ISO. While I think I understand
    the basic theory, I still have to understand how it works in the real world.
    PeterN, Jan 4, 2014
    1. Advertisements

  2. PeterN

    PeterN Guest

    And my Army training (MP)
    And another gubbmint enforcement job
    PeterN, Jan 4, 2014
    1. Advertisements

  3. PeterN

    Savageduck Guest

    That should do it, but I knew some pretty sensitive MPs. ;-)
    You should try my former line of work and see what can be handed out by
    some of the clientele and a few of those subordinates I had to
    supervise. Then there were upper level administrators, managers, and
    politicians each with conflicting agenda.
    Savageduck, Jan 4, 2014
  4. PeterN

    PeterN Guest

    Nope. Not all my imagesdo well. Indeed far from it. However, after a
    portfolio evaluation, I have been invited to compete for the privilege
    of displaying some of my images in a gallery. It is a legitimate
    competition. No entry fee, and no gallery fee. The truth is that I am
    struggling for improvement. I know I have a tendency to overprocess in
    post, and am fighting that.

    That image was a deliberate exaggeration that was intended to be a
    characterized image of the cattle egrets. I made another version where I
    used Fratcills, but do not have it here. I have no concern that some
    don't like the effects.

    BTW here is one where i used that program for a different effect.
    In this image I used the trial version:
    < impression.jpg>

    Surprise! What can I say.
    You are looking at a low quality jpeg.
    PeterN, Jan 4, 2014
  5. PeterN

    PeterN Guest

    I wish I was one hundredth as good as those guys. But, i do strive for
    my individuality, and accept the lack of general acceptance that comes
    with it.
    I still have a lot of technique to learn.
    PeterN, Jan 4, 2014
  6. PeterN

    PeterN Guest

    My CC has an anything goes policy. We have print categories monochrome &
    color. Groups B, A, & AA. We have digital B, A & AA and creative.
    Members are permitted to submit up to three images in each category. I
    am in group A, in all classes. Our creative group is for submissions
    that contain altered reality. since altered reality images are permitted
    in any other category, it is up to the maker to decide whether the image
    will go into his regular group, or creative.
    As to how well my images do, you may Google Syosset Camera Club,
    PeterN, Jan 4, 2014
  7. PeterN

    Whiskers Guest

    Not so rapidly that you can't monitor it and to some extent predict it.
    I don't know what "getting the blinkies" means, but talking about "1.7
    underexposure" suggests to me that you are using automatic exposure, not
    a manual setting. Automation is OK with average subjects for which you
    are content with average results, but your subjects are far from
    Whiskers, Jan 4, 2014
  8. PeterN

    Whiskers Guest

    Both those people worked very hard at understanding their materials and
    perfecting basic technique. One of them went mad.

    The fundamental work of Ansel Adams on assessing light and shade and
    determining exposure to achieve a desired result, is well worth learning
    about - even if only via simplified explanations. The "zone system" he
    devised may not be directly transferable to hand-held digital cameras,
    but the underlying approach certainly is.
    Whiskers, Jan 4, 2014
  9. PeterN

    Tony Cooper Guest

    People just aren't going to understand, Peter, that not everyone's
    goal is the tack-sharp image that exactly replicates nature.

    I don't particularly like the image you've linked to above. It's not
    a style that I'd go for under any circumstances. I'm not going to
    knock it, though, because I understand that what you and I go for are
    two completely different things.

    Success for both of us is an image that we look at feel good about
    having taken and processed. It's nice to have someone else admire it,
    but it's not necessary.
    Tony Cooper, Jan 4, 2014
  10. PeterN

    me Guest

    Just remember the autoiso programming loop is running inside the
    exposure programming loop.
    me, Jan 4, 2014
  11. Do you ever use a camera outside?

    I'm reminded of a shot that Ansel Adams took. He later
    described it various ways, but the fun description was from his
    son (aged 10 or so at the time) years later after his father had
    passed on. Whatever, Adams stopped his car jumped out and in a
    frantic rush was able to get exactly 1, count 'em, just 1
    exposure! But, he blew it.

    He couldn't find his lightmeter, estimated the exposure, and was
    seriously wrong.

    You might have heard the story of how much work he spend
    enhancing that one underexposed negative. Months, and every
    chemical process he could think of.

    The photograph was "Moonrise, Hernandez, New Mexico". It made
    Ansel Adams famous.

    The point is that light can and does change very very fast. It
    can change as fast as you can turn from looking that direction
    to looking this direction.

    Auto ISO or Auto Exposure modes are extremely useful for high
    end photography.
    You are 1) wrong, and 2) off base anyway. What he (clearly)
    meant was that he has set Exposure Compensation to -1.7 stops,
    and is still getting indications of overexposure on the LCD's
    Highlight display. We don't know if he is using Auto Exposure
    or Manual Exposure, or Auto ISO, or not. It doesn't make any
    Automation is OK when it works, Manual is also OK when it works.
    Saying that only one or the other ever works is blindingly
    Floyd L. Davidson, Jan 4, 2014
  12. But the point is still that they decided what they wanted to do
    was not what everyone else was doing. Eventually, and in
    neither case did it happen quickly, their ideas were accepted as
    better than what they had decided not to do...
    You are missing the point entirely. That is certainly useful,
    but it isn't something that anyone ever suggested was
    essentially wrong and to be avoided. That's merely part of the
    technical methodology, and was just as useful to someone who
    artistically was at the other end of the spectrum from Adams.

    Adams' point was that 1) photography should bring out the
    beauty, 2) it should not emulate other art forms, such as the
    Pictorialism style of painting, and 3) it should be "straight
    photography" expressing in sharp detail what existed in a scene.
    Floyd L. Davidson, Jan 4, 2014
  13. And the way to get it out is with Manual Exposure mode.

    You choose the aperture and shutter speed and let the camera
    select an ISO value to ensure the image is bright enough. That
    avoids trying to keep track of conflicting automatic loops that
    affect artistic intent, thus making it easier to track what
    effect the auto adjustment is having on the image.
    Floyd L. Davidson, Jan 4, 2014
  14. PeterN

    me Guest

    Actually, no. You are still running under the constraints imposed by
    the exposure program. In this case it is manual. If this were not the
    case then iso wouldn't float up until it's max allowable setting as
    the available light changes.
    me, Jan 4, 2014
  15. Not at all.
    ISO has nothing to do with exposure.

    Exposure is how much light falls on the sensor, and determines how much
    signal is produced.

    ISO is how sensitive the "sensor module" is to light, which is
    to say how much the signal produced is amplified.

    Two very different things.
    Floyd L. Davidson, Jan 4, 2014
  16. PeterN

    PeterN Guest

    PeterN, Jan 4, 2014
  17. PeterN

    sid Guest

    Well, it does have to do with correct exposure.
    And the signal, when using auto iso, is amplified to a point the exposure
    program determines is the correct exposure
    But the value of one leads directly to the value of the other, for all
    values of correct exposure. Incorrect exposure, neither make a blind bit of
    difference to the other.
    sid, Jan 4, 2014
  18. PeterN

    PeterN Guest

    I am thanking both of you for you helpful advice.
    PeterN, Jan 4, 2014
  19. There is an indirect relationship, but ISO does not directly
    affect exposure. It directly changes the brightness of the
    recorded data, not how much light hits the sensor. There is a
    technical difference.

    However, most people aren't into techie distinctions, and see
    "exposure" as a triangle with aperture, shutter speed, and ISO
    as the three corners. For most purposes that works, even if it
    isn't correct.
    You're missing the point though. The problem was that when Auto
    Exposure and Auto ISO are used there are two feedback loops, and
    the stated purpose of using Manual Exposure was to get out of
    that situation by disabling one of the two loops.
    And the way it is done is entirely different. With Manual
    Exposure set, you manually set exposure! That can be done for
    artistic effect, or for technical reasons, but it is done
    manually. What Auto ISO does is only set how bright the
    recorded data is. That makes it a fairly simple (once a person
    gets a handle on the technical specifics) operation that
    requires less time and effort in the field to keep track of than
    using fully automatic exposure as well as fully automatic ISO.
    Floyd L. Davidson, Jan 4, 2014
  20. PeterN

    me Guest

    I didn't say exposure. I said the exposure program within the camera.
    me, Jan 4, 2014
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.