What the reviewers don't view...

Discussion in 'Australia Photography' started by Focus, May 22, 2008.

  1. I suspected early on that you were a troll.
    Troll.
     
    G Paleologopoulos, May 24, 2008
    #41
    1. Advertisements

  2. Focus

    Focus Guest

    If you don't understand anything about photography, you can always start the
    name calling game. All kids here do.

    Dica, Dicasa, Annika....you're in good company.
     
    Focus, May 25, 2008
    #42
    1. Advertisements

  3. Focus

    Dica Photo Guest

    Dica Photo, May 25, 2008
    #43
  4. Focus

    ben brugman Guest

    I am using a D70 now for several years. First year I bought it just before a
    holiday, memory was still expensive in those days so bought 1 Gb flash card
    and borrowed another 0.5 Gb flash memory. Offcourse did some experimenting
    with the camera during my vacation, but because of memory limitations did
    not do to much double takes. Worked years with slides then years with
    negatives and now digital I am very content with the matrix metering of the
    D70. Even with my experience I trust the matrix metering better than my own
    judgement in most cases and must say I am very content with the results. The
    sunny 16 rule has never done it for me (I live on the 52 degrees north) and
    the sunny 16 rule behaves different depending on the latitude you are on.
    The mediterenian has a lot more light during sunny spots that the latitude I
    live on. So I think that the electronic circuitry outperforms the sunny 16
    rule almost all of the time. (This also goes for the few point and shoots I
    have used as wel).

    So if nothing else is available I would use the sunny 16, but use the
    electronic circuitry when it's available. And sometimes using the histogram
    to adjust. (It's only a single histogram, so avoiding clipping using the
    histogram is not totaly proof. Clipping can still occure in one off the
    colors even when the histogram shows no clipping).

    ben (Not a strong believer in the sunny 16 rule.)
     
    ben brugman, May 25, 2008
    #44
  5. Focus

    Annika1980 Guest

    That's not what you said earlier when you requested pics taken on a
    "bright sunny day."

    So you want to see photos taken INTO the sun, is that it?
    I usually try to avoid that for reasons that should be obvious.
    When I do take one into the sun I'll often use fill flash as in this
    one:

    http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/95582293

    Here's another that is close to what you are talking about:
    http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/95596213

    So what is it exactly that you claim the 40D cannot do?
     
    Annika1980, May 25, 2008
    #45
  6. Focus

    Dica Photo Guest

    "Annika1980" <> schreef in bericht



    It isn't the Canon Annika, its Focus himself;)
     
    Dica Photo, May 25, 2008
    #46
  7. Focus

    Dudley Hanks Guest

    I've never had much trouble with my cameras' meters, either. But, this
    thread was started by an OP who didn't like the results a particular camera
    was producing.

    My response was, if you aren't happy with the results you are getting from
    your camera in certain lighting situations, you can always fall back on the
    sunny 16 rule -- especially with a digital camera.

    Obviously, if your camera produces bad results all of the time, getting a
    new camera is the way to go. A fair sized chunk of the camera's cost covers
    the light meter. And, if the meter doesn't work, the camera is a bad deal.
    But, if there is a quirk in the meter that only raises its head
    ocaissionally, there are old standbys like the sunny 16 to help.

    Now, if you live in an area that has somewhat different lighting, and if the
    sunny 16 consistently gives over or under exposures, I tend to think it
    should be easy to modify the rule accordingly. If the rule says to use f/16
    in bright sunny skys with ISO 100and a shutter speed of 1/125 - 160, but the
    pictures look too light, adjust one of the settings accordingly. The sun's
    intensity won't change much from day to day. Nor should your camera's light
    capturing ability.

    I used the rule mainly with older film cameras. Since I developed my own
    film, I could adjust the darkroom processing of a print based on the density
    of the negative. The sunny 16 rule would give me a negative with a usable
    density. Sometimes it might be a bit light, sometimes a bit dark. But in
    95% of the images I shot, I could print a nice pic from a shot the rule had
    exposed.

    Given the versatility of digital images and Photoshop, I would think that
    the rule would be just as applicable for those people who aren't happy with
    the results their camera is producing in those limited number of instances
    when their meter is tricked. Obviously, if your camera's meter is doing a
    good job, you will have no reason to fall back on the old standard.

    Take Care,
    Dudley
     
    Dudley Hanks, May 25, 2008
    #47
  8. Focus

    ben brugman Guest

    The difference between the pictures of the OP's camera wast 2/3 of a stop.
    Although this is not consistent, it should be consistent enough to give you
    usable results. The sunny 16 rule won't be more consistent.

    Ben

    I thought the sunny 16 rule was use f/16, and the shutterspeet equal to the
    ISO.
    The dark picture of the OP was 5.6 1/400 at ISO 100.
    The lighter picture of the OP was 5.6 1/250 at ISO 100.
    Sunny 16 1/100 at ISO 100. (OR 5.6 would make 800) even darker than the
    dark
    picture of the OP.
    My opinion was that the lighter picture (1/250) was better then the darker
    (1/400)

    So the sunny 16 rule (1/100 at 100 ISO) would not have improved the picture.
    Your sunny 16 rule (1/125 at 100 ISO) would have made the picture still some
    darker.
     
    ben brugman, May 25, 2008
    #48
  9. Focus

    Dudley Hanks Guest

    Inconsistancy is the OP's problem, not the 2/3 stop underexposure. If the
    camera always under or over exposed by 2/3 stop, then thee exposure
    compensation feature could be used to adjust for it. This is the case with
    my A720; the camera consistently over-exposes by 2/3 stop. Accordingly,
    since I know this is going to happen, I dial down my compensation by that
    amount and I consistently get good results under almost any lighting
    configuration.

    With the scenario described by the OP, a number of pictures could be taken
    of the same scene, with some being exposed properly and some being slightly
    off.

    I agree with you that 2/3 stop isn't that big of a deal, so the pic should
    be salvageable. But, if a photographer wants to get the best image to start
    with, then that variance might be sufficient to cause problems.

    Hence, my point:

    If your camera acts iradically in some lighting situations due to metering
    problems, then you can fall back on a manual mode for more accurate results,
    or should I say more predictable results.

    When you are in a matrixed metering mode, you are at the mercy of the
    camera's electronics. And, if the camera's circuitry is either triggered by
    a fast changing highlight, as is the case with shimmering water, or simply
    picking the wrong segments to base calculations on, you are basically going
    to get random results.

    However, if you fall back on the sunny 16, or some other rule of thumb that
    puts you into manual mode, then your results will be much more predictable.
    You take a picture based on your rule of thumb. If the result you view in
    your LCD is off, then you can adjust your manual settings, and, if the
    lighting hasn't changed significantly, which it shouldn't have on a bright
    sunny day, then your next picture should be better. At worst, you shouldn't
    have to take more than a couple of test pictures before you get what you
    want.

    To say that this approach doesn't work is to say that photography was not
    possible prior to modern light meters, and that would be a totally ludicrous
    stance to adopt given that old-timers used to use this method without the
    advantage of instant feedback. Even with a week or two wait before viewing
    final prints, the rule made it possible for innumerable photogs to get good
    pictures. I can't help it if you never took the time to learn how to
    analyze a given scene for proper exposure.

    Good Luck,
    Dudley
     
    Dudley Hanks, May 25, 2008
    #49
  10. Focus

    Mr.T Guest

    Far better to take a spot reading of a roughly 18% neutral area, and then
    lock exposure or set manual exposure. That's what I do, before checking the
    resultant pic and histogram on a digital, if possible.
    If you don't have time for any of that, you're better off sticking with the
    camera's auto exposure, plus any predetermined constant compensation factor
    IMO.
    I haven't used the sunny 16 rule for decades. Only really useful when your
    metering is stuffed, or non existent AFAIC.

    MrT.
     
    Mr.T, May 26, 2008
    #50
  11. Focus

    Noons Guest

    Quite true. Although I get better results
    with "sunny f11". Go figure?
    The other one that works quite well is to take a reading
    of the palm of the hand and then open up 1 stop.
    At least with slide film: never tried it with the D80....
     
    Noons, May 26, 2008
    #51
  12. And if you don't like that and have trouble figuring out how
    to switch to 'average' metering, RTFM.

    -Wolfgang
     
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, May 26, 2008
    #52
  13. Focus

    Mark Thomas Guest

    Dudley, may I congratulate you on your patience and very good
    explanation. I would have given up long ago, given someone doesn't
    appear to take advice very well....

    Exactly!! I note Focus posted two links (which WW has correctly pointed
    out were obviously NOT taken within 'seconds' of each other) showing
    *precisely* that situation - shot over rough water with reflections and
    patchy sunlit areas... what a surprise he got different results... sigh.

    It is much easier to blame a camera than learn something or, heaven
    forbid, admit that you don't know everything... That's why I avoid Mr
    Focus. It's pretty clear when someone wants nothing but praise.
    Grin. On the mark, Dudley!
     
    Mark Thomas, May 26, 2008
    #53
  14. Focus

    Focus Guest

    Right. They were taken within 0.10 of a second.
    Do you really think I got nothing better to do then make some false claims,
    forge EXIF data, etc. ?
    Please! Get a clue what the f**k you're talking about!
    That stupid box can't even measure the light as good as a 100,- P&S?
    What is there possible to defend? IT'S a piece of shit!
    Read DPReview about the smaller brother: the 450D:
    SAME problem! Over exposes in high contrast areas: EXACTLY what I said,
    except they forgot the inconsistency, but DPReview has always been a Canon
    fan.
    Oh, and focus problems are included in the price also!
    But that's an old story...
     
    Focus, May 26, 2008
    #54
  15. Ha, that is a really good point. I must remember that!! I wonder how many
    times that has happened?

    Steve
     
    Steve Sherman, May 26, 2008
    #55
  16. Don't any of you know that the camera exposure does not matter!
    Exposure is called Photoshop.


    Steve
     
    Steve Sherman, May 26, 2008
    #56
  17. Here's what FOCUS said on May 4 2008 7:38 am, on "Ferrari butchered by
    Sony A350"
    Things change, hey, Focus?

    But yes, it's *always* the camera.

    (O:
     
    mark.thomas.7, May 26, 2008
    #57
  18. Focus

    Dudley Hanks Guest

    Hey, I like that one. I'll have to give it a try. A fellow never knows
    when his meter might misread a situation, and it's nice to have another tool
    in the toolkit.

    Thanks,
    Dudley
     
    Dudley Hanks, May 27, 2008
    #58
  19. Focus

    Dudley Hanks Guest

    Yeah, average metering would be an option as well, so would center-weighted
    (one of my favourite modes).

    I never said I didn't like it. In, fact, I am quite impressed with the
    advancements camera manufacturers have made with segmented light analysis.
    My current camera of choice, the Canon Powershot A720 really does a good job
    of calculating a useable f/stop in the really crazy situations I force it
    into. Especially when you consider the incredibly screwed up perspective I
    judge my shots from.

    But, in a situation where there are quickly changing specular / shimmering
    highlights, etc, if the matrix gets tricked, there's a good chance that
    other metering modes could be fooled as well.

    Hence, the manual mode rule of thumb is just another fall-back procedure
    that could give a different, yet equally good image, as one produced with
    the aid of electronics -- as long as the photographer knows how to use it
    and is patient enough to bracket appropriately.

    It's really too bad some of you aren't more adventurous. Manual mode
    shooting can be very rewarding.

    But, to each there own.

    Take Care,
    Dudley
     
    Dudley Hanks, May 27, 2008
    #59
  20. Focus

    Dudley Hanks Guest

    I've spent a lot of time tutoring disabled individuals on how to use
    Windows. They have had a variety of physical and sensory limitations which
    needed to be overcome in order for them to make effective use of these
    wonderful little boxes. Sometimes, I'd have to explain a given concept or
    procedure in 15 or 20 different ways, keeping close attention on what the
    individual did after each explanation, modifying the nextt slightly in order
    to address how I perceived the person either misunderstood what I was
    saying, or simply didn't have the necessary ability to use the information
    effectively.

    Eventually, we'd find the magic combination, and they'd be off to the races.
    It's a great way to build patience and communications skills, and it's very
    rewarding too. I strongly recommend that anyone with computer experience
    and some extra time go to a local community college / vocational training
    centre and volunteer a few hours.

    The difference is, I guess, the individuals I tutored WANTED to learn, so
    they kept at it until they got it. Some posters here, either are too
    entrenched in the way they do things to seriously consider another approach.
    Or, they just like to cause headaches.

    I've got a lot of time to waste, so the challenge is either to run the
    mental cases into a corner they can't get out of, or actually show them
    there is another way.

    Besides, I often learn something in the exchange as well.

    Take Care,
    Dudley
     
    Dudley Hanks, May 27, 2008
    #60
    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.