[QUOTE]\nDo you ever use a camera outside?[/QUOTE]\n\nSeldom anywhere else.\n[QUOTE]\nI'm reminded of a shot that Ansel Adams took. He later\ndescribed it various ways, but the fun description was from his\nson (aged 10 or so at the time) years later after his father had\npassed on. Whatever, Adams stopped his car jumped out and in a\nfrantic rush was able to get exactly 1, count 'em, just 1\nexposure! But, he blew it.\n\nHe couldn't find his lightmeter, estimated the exposure, and was\nseriously wrong.\n\nYou might have heard the story of how much work he spend\nenhancing that one underexposed negative. Months, and every\nchemical process he could think of.[/QUOTE]\n\n,-\-\-\-<[URL]http://www.hcc.commnet.edu/artmuseum/anseladams/details/moonrise.html>[/URL]\n| F. Technical Aspects\n|\n| Camera: 8 X 10 view camera\n| Lens: Cooke triple convertible lens.\n| Light meter: lost!\n| Film: Speed: ASA 64\n| Filter: Wratten No. 15 (G) filter\n| Exposure: 1 second at f/32.\n| Development: dilute D-23 and ten developer to water sequences.\n| Years later - refixed, washed the negative, and treated the lower\n| section with a dilute solution of Kodak IN-5 intensifier.\n`-\-\-\-\n\nA Wratten No. 15 filter is 'deep yellow' and would normally call for\nan extra 1.5 or 2 'stops' exposure to take advantage of its 'darken the\nsky' effect while leaving landscape relatively normally exposed (all\nother things being equal).\n\nAn exposure of 1 second at f/32 ('EV 10') on ASA 64 emulsion should put\nthe face of the moon into Adam's 'zone 8' or 'zone 9' (not quite\n'maximum density' in the negative); the deep yellow filter might make\nthe moon slightly darker - as Mr Adams later said, he thought the moon\nwould be in 'zone 7' (see below).\n\nThe landscape will of course be a darker, and not very different from\nthe sky.\n\nI don't think that would be "underexposed" for a dark scene which he\nwanted to show as a dark image. The difficulty in printing is down to\nthe tricky subject, not to faulty camera technique. Mr Adams had enough\nexperience to be confident that he'd get a usable negative even though\nhe estimated the exposure (based on his knowledge of the brightness of\nthe moon, which is of course in full sunlight) without using his\nexposure meter. He even described his choice of exposure in terms of\nhis usual "Weston" exposure meter's dial, in at least one description of\nthe occasion.\n\n,-\-\-\-<[URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Moonrise,_Hernandez,_New_Mexico&oldid=585518771>[/URL]\n|\n| The making of Moonrise has attracted unusually strong interest. In 1941,\n| Secretary of the Interior Harold Ickes hired Adams for six months to\n| create photographs of lands under the jurisdiction of the Department of\n| the Interior. Adams was accompanied by his young son Michael and his\n| best friend Cedric Wright on a long road trip around the west. They came\n| upon the scene while traveling through the Chama River valley toward\n| EspaÃ±ola in late afternoon on NovemberÂ 1; accounts of what transpired\n| differ considerably.\n|\n| The image appeared in U.S. Camera Annual 1943, and Adams gave this\n| account:\n| It was made after sundown, there was a twilight glow on the distant\n| peaks and clouds. The average light values of the foreground were placed\n| on the "U" of the Weston Master meter; apparently the values of the moon\n| and distant peaks did not lie higher than the "A" of the meter. . . .\n| Some may consider this photograph a "tour de force" but I think of it as\n| a rather normal photograph of a typical New Mexican landscape. Twilight\n| photography is unfortunately neglected; what may be drab and\n| uninteresting by daylight may assume a magnificent quality in the\n| halflight between sunset and dark.\n|\n| Later accounts were considerably more dramatic. According to Mary\n| Alinder, they encountered a "fantastic scene", a church and cemetery\n| near Hernandez, New Mexico, and pulled to the side of the road. Adams\n| recalled that he yelled at his son Michael and at Wright to "Get this!\n| Get that, for God's sake! We don't have much time!" Desperate to\n| capture the image in the fading light, they scrambled to set up the\n| tripod and camera, knowing that only moments remained before the light\n| was gone.\n|\n| Adams gave a similar account in Examples\n| I could not find my Weston exposure meter! The situation was desperate:\n| the low sun was trailing the edge of clouds in the west, and shadow\n| would soon dim the white crosses. . . . I suddenly realized that I knew\n| the luminance of the moonâ€”250Â cd/ft2. Using the Exposure Formula, I\n| placed this value on ZoneÂ VII. . . . Realizing as I released the shutter\n| that I had an unusual photograph which deserved a duplicate negative, I\n| quickly reversed the film holder, but as I pulled the darkslide, the\n| sunlight passed from the white crosses; I was a few seconds too late!\n| The lone negative suddenly became precious.\n`-\-\-\-\n\n,-\-\-\-<[URL]http://www.hcc.commnet.edu/artmuseum/anseladams/details/moonrise.html>[/URL]\n| E. Once the photograph is taken, is the development and printing a\n| mechanical process?\n| No, it is not mechanical. Although there is a procedure, there is much\n| judgment involved on the part of the artist. Ansel said that the\n| negative for Moonrise was difficult to print. He tried many methods\n| using different chemicals and times and papers. With the negative in the\n| enlarger, he increased the light hitting certain areas (burning-in)\n| which made the sky blacker and the clouds less bright so the moon would\n| stand out more. With all these artistic adjustments, Adams said "it is\n| safe to say that no two prints are precisely the same."\n`-\-\-\-\n\nNot unusual to try different enlarging and printing techniques for a\n"difficult" negative, particularly one so lucrative.\n\nHe had a track record of getting great images at short notice as\nunplanned opportunities arose. He was very good at choosing exposure\nvalues and processing techniques.\n[QUOTE]\nThe photograph was "Moonrise, Hernandez, New Mexico". It made\nAnsel Adams famous.[/QUOTE]\n\nWell it added to the lustre of the fame that had been growing for 20\nyears, and probably brought his work to the attention of more people.\n[QUOTE]\nThe point is that light can and does change very very fast. It\ncan change as fast as you can turn from looking that direction\nto looking this direction.[/QUOTE]\n\nYou'll notice that Mr Adams had time to stop the car, set up his tripod\nand 8"x10" field camera and lens, and frame and focus the shot manually,\nbefore inserting the dark-slide with the film. PeterN is sitting or\nstanding in a boat or on land, with a digital SLR in his hands ready to\nshoot. That gives him a huge time advantage over Mr Adams with /his/\nkit. His camera even has an exposure meter built in (albeit not\nconveniently for taking manual incident-light readings).\n\n,-\-\-\-<[URL]http://www.hcc.commnet.edu/artmuseum/anseladams/details/moonrise.html>[/URL]\n| B. How did chance lead him to take this photograph?\n| Ansel Adams was returning to Santa Fe, New Mexico after a discouraging\n| day of photography. From the highway he glanced left and "saw an\n| extraordinary situation - an inevitable photograph! I almost ditched the\n| car and rushed to set up my 8 X 10" camera. I was yelling to my\n| companions to bring me things from the carâ€¦I had a clear visualization\n| of the image I wanted butâ€¦I could not find my exposure meter! The\n| situation was desperate: the low sun was trailing the edge of clouds in\n| the west, and shadow would soon dim the white crosses." He felt at a\n| loss to guess the correct exposure, but suddenly realized he knew the\n| luminance of the moon and quickly took the shot.\n`-\-\-\-\n[QUOTE]\nAuto ISO or Auto Exposure modes are extremely useful for high\nend photography.[/QUOTE]\n\nSometimes. For certain values of "high end".\n[QUOTE]\nYou are 1) wrong, and 2) off base anyway. What he (clearly)\nmeant was that he has set Exposure Compensation to -1.7 stops,\nand is still getting indications of overexposure on the LCD's\nHighlight display. We don't know if he is using Auto Exposure\nor Manual Exposure, or Auto ISO, or not. It doesn't make any\ndifference![/QUOTE]\n\nIf the exposure is set manually, the camera knows nothing about\n'exposure compensation'; the only purpose for an 'exposure compensation'\nis to over-ride an automatic exposure system.\n[QUOTE]\nAutomation is OK when it works, Manual is also OK when it works.\nSaying that only one or the other ever works is blindingly\nignorant.[/QUOTE]\n\nDid I say that? I said that for a subject an automatic system can't\nhandle, manual is the best approach. PeterN is clearly relying on\nautomation, and getting into difficulties as a result.\n\nYes, I'm biased; I learnt to take photographs before anything was\nautomated. I still believe that knowing how to do things manually is\ngoing to help you to understand what an automatic system is trying to\ndo, and what it can't do. I also like to think that *I* am taking the\nphotograph, not the camera. You are of course free to disagree.