Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 603 of 1795 FirstFirst ... 10350355359360160260360460561365370311031603 ... LastLast
Results 6,021 to 6,030 of 17950
  1. #6021
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia
    Posts
    3,650


    Turo, you and me both, I am going to be in Orlando next month but I don't think I'll make to the down to the Keys... good looking image.
    Last edited by XaiLo; 07-11-2008 at 03:52 PM.
    I thought about who I am... and realized I was an
    unformed, unreconciled imagery, without "GOD"


    NikonD?
    and some other Nikon stuff

    0.0%

  2. #6022
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,610
    Quote Originally Posted by Turo View Post
    The waters of Key west, gotta love 'em! Makes me wish I was swimming there right now..[/url]
    man, that reminds me of the philippines when i was still a kid.
    my uncle took me swimming by a reef one time and i still remember that like it was just two days ago. THANKS for sharing a great photo!

    sorry to go off topic a little bit...
    to reply to the other posters.. yea, the blue tinge is around the clipped highlights which is the rice, sauce cup and some of the read bowl on the left. it could be CA i guess but I don't know. ALways thought those were apparently only in high contrasts (i.e. black against white or vice versa)

    And thanks DPR, glad you still even like this one, lol!
    I dislike it (mainly cause of the clipping)

    I didn't lighten the shot at all. No post processing. This was SOOC and posted.
    THat's to tell you that even at -1, this D80 can somehow manage to clip these highlights
    As VR mentioned, I too sit around -7, -1 EV. Most of the time though, I don't have any issues.

    My flash shots are actually way bright. I have to set the flash power to -0.3
    Anyway, here's another shot in the woods late in the afternoon.
    Very even light source from what I could tell. We were basically just in the shadow of the trees.

    heres what I mean:


    this shot's exif is:
    50mm @ 1.8
    1/100sec, ISO320, Matrix/Pattern Metering
    It was shot using Av with -0.7EV

    here's the location:



    I reduced the exposure in photoshop on the 2nd shot to match how it looked in real life.
    ...................
    Nikon D80 + TAmROn 17-50mm f/2.8
    - Sandisk 2GB Extreme III SD Card
    - Crumpler 5 Million Dollar Home

    - had Canon PowerShot S3 IS

    For some of my shots:http://flickr.com/photos/truflip/

  3. #6023
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    City of Lights, City of Casinos, City of Sin -- Must be Las Vegas!
    Posts
    1,512
    I was sort of bored last night so I figured I had to take a photo of something, anything. Well this was the outcome.

    D200
    10.5mm
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Canon G10 - Nikon D3 - Sony P&S - Flickr Account - Non-updated Website

  4. #6024
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    21


    Once again, was under exposed. I wanted to go for an ambient lighting, but had to brighten it up after. Somehow it looks great on my camera, but when I upload it to my computer, it's always under exposed...

    Once again all constructive criticism is welcomed!

  5. #6025
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,409
    jemr, rather than check on the lcd, check the histogram. that will give you a far better indication on exposure.
    D800e l V1 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l EP5 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  6. #6026
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    369
    Quote Originally Posted by jemr View Post


    Once again, was under exposed. I wanted to go for an ambient lighting, but had to brighten it up after. Somehow it looks great on my camera, but when I upload it to my computer, it's always under exposed...

    Once again all constructive criticism is welcomed!
    Definitely way too underexposed. Post all of your EXIF data for that image here. If nothing else, at least take your photos in RAW format so that you can edit the exposure without effecting your image quality. You should be shooting at a low shutter speed for that image. Consider getting an SB400 if you're going to continually do close-ups like that.

    Cool flower though, keep taking em!
    flickr
    nikon d40 | nikkor 55-200mm vr | nikkor 18-55mm | nikkor 70-300mm vr | SB 400 | My Flickr Animal Portraits Group! Join if you enjoy animals.

  7. #6027
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    2,132
    jemr, if it looked bright on your LCD than your LCD brightness is too high.

    Go into your menu options on your camera and turn down the LCD brightness to get a picture that is more accurate.
    Nikon D300 | Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 | Nikkor AF-S 70-300mm VR | Nikkor AF 35mm f/2 D | SB-600 | Lowepro Voyager C | Lowepro Slingshot 300 AW

    For Sale:
    Nikkor AF 35mm f/2 D - Like New (FX compatible)

    Wish List
    Nikkor AF-S 17-55 f/2.8
    Nikkor AF-S 70-200 f/4 VRII
    Tokina AF 11-16 f/2.8
    SB-900 (2)
    Umbrellas
    New Tripod

  8. #6028
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,409
    Quote Originally Posted by truflip View Post
    Anyway, here's another shot in the woods late in the afternoon.
    Very even light source from what I could tell. We were basically just in the shadow of the trees.

    heres what I mean:


    this shot's exif is:
    50mm @ 1.8
    1/100sec, ISO320, Matrix/Pattern Metering
    It was shot using Av with -0.7EV
    pure white in the top, (or therabouts), and pure black hair, (or thereabouts.). so whats the problem here ? dslr doesnt have a good enuf dynamic range to nail that perfectly for every shade.

    there is also a lightsource, (dappled light thru the tress), hitting her face and the top part of her jacket blowing the white. if the camera had exposed for that super bright white on top of her jacket, there would be no detail at all in her hair and it would completely blend into the background.

    the other issue is that iso320 exaggerates that cos your making your sensor even more sensitive to light. so anything light is not only going to blow a little cos of the metering, but is going to be even worse cos of the sensitivity.

    so you probably have 1.3 stops too much sensitivity to bright whites and due to that direct light source on the top part of her jacket, another 2 stops out...thats 3.3 stops. i'd say thats pretty much exactly what you blew the white by.

    so think about this...drop 3.3 stops and you probably expose that white perfectly but you underexpose everything else. if that makes sense.
    D800e l V1 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l EP5 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  9. #6029
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    2,132
    Well Rooz I don't think he should drop his ISO, as that means dropping his shutter speed...and at 1/100 already, he is entering into motion blur territory. He could have tried 1/60...but again...with a living subject, even something ever so slight (breathing, blinking, hair blowing, body swaying) can reduce the sharpness of the shot.

    Though everything you say is correct. More ISO can oversensitize the sensor and make it easier to blow the highlights...I'm not sure you could do any better here, honestly. I think it's a good shot.
    Last edited by Visual Reality; 07-11-2008 at 09:37 PM.
    Nikon D300 | Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 | Nikkor AF-S 70-300mm VR | Nikkor AF 35mm f/2 D | SB-600 | Lowepro Voyager C | Lowepro Slingshot 300 AW

    For Sale:
    Nikkor AF 35mm f/2 D - Like New (FX compatible)

    Wish List
    Nikkor AF-S 17-55 f/2.8
    Nikkor AF-S 70-200 f/4 VRII
    Tokina AF 11-16 f/2.8
    SB-900 (2)
    Umbrellas
    New Tripod

  10. #6030
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,409
    Quote Originally Posted by Visual Reality View Post
    .I'm not sure you could do any better here, honestly. I think it's a good shot.
    i didnt say it wasn't a good shot. i totally agree with you...i think its an excellent shot ! i'm just pointing out WHY the camera exposed like it did since flip was frustrated with it. ie: it is not a fault. also trying to explain the metering difficulties you can have with so many different light shades, (and in particular when one of them is a high contrast light), and even more difficulties in exposing it right due to dynamic range. (i would never have posted that shot saying there was an issue with it, cos i dont think there are any issues.)

    you are right about the iso too. but again, thats the compromise to be made. do you risk making the cam oversensitive to highlights by upping the iso in exchange for a higher shutter speed to avoid motion blur ? i would say, absolutely.

    if i had taken that shot and manually metered i would have done the exact same thing as the matrix did. sacrifice the top highlights to get the rest of the frame well balanced.
    Last edited by Rooz; 07-11-2008 at 10:14 PM.
    D800e l V1 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l EP5 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •