Am I close

[forno]

First one feels pretty close to a good exposure

All straight out of the camera, just resized

http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/4250/img6485bn1.jpg

http://img182.imageshack.us/img182/3758/img6487ml4.jpg

http://img111.imageshack.us/img111/5426/img6491rg0.jpg

[Honest Gaza]

Which lens for the first one Forno ?

[forno]

All the Tamron 17-50 2.8 Gazman:D

http://www.onthenet.com.au/~townsend/dickieknee.gif

[shoey]

Hey Forno,

First one look sgood to me. The second and third seem a little under on here tho.

[zmikers]

Ya I agree, first one looks alright to me. The last two lick a little under exposed.

[DonSchap]

Meter for the shadows ... the results often turn out better. Most people don't give a hoot about the sky, washed out or not, but that architecture really catches their interest. Too dark and you defeat the reason to look ... or just make it too hard. (just a thought :rolleyes: )

[cwphoto]

Yeah good shots sunshine, agree that the last two are about 1EV under in my book. :)

[forno]

Cool, should have done the last one at f3.2 or 3.5

[Prospero]

While I agree that the second is underexposed, I would have exposed it the same as you did. I think that if you would up the exposure with 1 stop you will only blow out a part of the sky, and that doesn't look good in my opinion. Instead, I would raise the darkness of the buildings in postprocessing. I hope you don't mind I did a quick edit of your image. If you do, please say so and I will remove it immediatly.

http://prospero.cabspace.com/pictures/img6487ml4.jpg

I made this edit with Nikon Capture NX using colour control points. With these points I raised the brightness of the foreground and raised the contrast of this part to avoid it from looking to flat. I also darkened the sky a little to bring out more detail in the clouds. I hope you like the edit.