Pleas help me understand (Page 6): if he had every thing in manual , Wendy which he more than likely did , then he could keep snapping all day and get the wrong pic . i always take one...

Bram boy Loc: Vancouver Island B.C. Canada

Wendy2 wrote:

What is the ISO on the first one? I meant to say the 2nd one was a lower ISO. So since it is a lower ISO, it is more over exposed.

if he had every thing in manual , Wendy which he more than
likely did , then he could keep snapping all day and get the wrong pic . i always take one in program p for nikons if im on a tripod. i forget what it is for canon, the runner up , just kidding, that is only if i think i may have a shot, the p is so i can compare to what i picked later on, but if your set up try all the angels you will learn quicker,

:mrgreen:

Bram boy Loc: Vancouver Island B.C. Canada

country wrote:

what settings should be different to offset the intense light that is causing it to be blown out... or maybe a polarizing filter??.. thanks...

well look at your subject , you got a hot roof , you got cold shrubs a ton of shade, in the left bushes, what do you want to convay ? a hot roof or detail in the shadows. i would say expose for the shadows , and bracket five stops eather way . this is why digital is so great , you would waste about a roll of film doing that. but
ten or more shots is costing you nothing. so fire away and learn

Bram boy Loc: Vancouver Island B.C. Canada

hb3 wrote:

Both are a bit blown out by the intense light in the upper left half of the photo...when I inspect both DLs and magnify the red section of the bridge, there is much more noise on the first image than on the second....

thats not noise, just more highlights being brought out

Bram boy Loc: Vancouver Island B.C. Canada

hb3 wrote:

Both are a bit blown out by the intense light in the upper left half of the photo...when I inspect both DLs and magnify the red section of the bridge, there is much more noise on the first image than on the second....

and how do you get noise??

Bram boy Loc: Vancouver Island B.C. Canada

Wendy2 wrote:

Not necessarily. It depends on how much light there is. Look at Jeep Daddy's explanation. I think it will help you understand it more. You would use higher ISO's in lower light situations, such as a museum, or a dark room. BUT the higher the ISO, the more noise you will get.

its hard to explain to some who has never did his home work, and has no idea what the H we are talking about. they want to take a short cut . it doesent work that way , at least get the basics down

Bram boy Loc: Vancouver Island B.C. Canada

country wrote:

so a lower iso tends to over expose?

no it depends on what your shutter speed is and your fsop, you and you alone over expose, or under expose , iso asa has nothing to do with it if you set 2400 iso and 1/30 sec fstop wide open guess what, your fstop and have to be able to handle the iso you have chosen. just shoot in auto or p untell you know what your doing

Bram boy Loc: Vancouver Island B.C. Canada

country wrote:

ok, thanks, im starting to get, just need to practice more.. I think having iso on auto was one of my problems...

not really it usuall can pick iso better than you, just stert out the lowest you you can go then set your f stop to what you think will be good, let your camera pick shutter speed. now take twenty pic of the same thing increasing your iso one click up at a time, a tripod would help, now do the same thing at a different fstop keep going tell you run out of fstops, now do it but let the camera pick the fstops and you pick the shutter speed, get to know your camera . dont waste another second

lighthouse Loc: No Fixed Abode

Bram Boy, are you going to go through the whole 6 pages and answer every post in the thread individually?

Bram boy Loc: Vancouver Island B.C. Canada

country wrote:

thanks to everyone for your input... I think we have concluded that I need to take iso off of auto...

i would not do that untell you prove to your self that you can choose a better setting than the camera can, leave it in auto and look at your info screen, and say hay why did the camera choose 1200 iso. then you choose 600 , then 400 then 200 and keep tabs on your other settings,

Bram boy Loc: Vancouver Island B.C. Canada

lighthouse wrote:

I am sorry nightski. I have to disagree. br Its no... (show quote)

good god each full f stop is twice a big as the next full one , or twice as small depending what way you are going up or down

Bram boy Loc: Vancouver Island B.C. Canada

lighthouse wrote:

Bram Boy, are you going to go through the whole 6 pages and answer every post in the thread individually?

hay i see your getting around pretty good also

Bram boy Loc: Vancouver Island B.C. Canada

lighthouse wrote:

Yes, F/2 is half the light of F/1.4. But that is o... (show quote)

sorry mr light just getting to yours now, your right'

cthahn

Wendy2 wrote:

I think what you are seeing is blown out highlights, not noise. They are both over exposed, but the 2nd one more so. The 2nd one was a higher ISO, right?

Why would you want to raise your ISO? My ISO is always at 100 unless of a low light condition. This is where the computer in the camera is of no value. unless you adjust for the problem. An incident reading light meter, if you understand it, will give better results.

Nightski

cthahn wrote:

Why would you want to raise your ISO? My ISO is always at 100 unless of a low light condition. This is where the computer in the camera is of no value. unless you adjust for the problem. An incident reading light meter, if you understand it, will give better results.

Exactly. Higher ISOs create noise. Noise is bad. Stay at 100 unless an act of God forces you to raise it. Okay, just a little humor here. :-) The act of God thing might be a little strong, but you get the point.

jenny Loc: in hiding:)

6 pages and no one has noticed the Op doesn't know a thing about a camera but is trying to use manual settings, which would necessitate having some idea of a workable ISO related to shutter speed and a depth of field that would render a landscape in reasonable focus No one has even asked WHY this person is trying to shoot in manual mode.The whole foreground is out of focus because of the aperture he/she has set.
Eventually another "twiddler" enters the thread advising shooting manual mode (!) because the choices there are either automatic or twiddling.
Then we have the insanity of someone coming on to attack a member who had absolutely nothing to do with this thread at all because in his sick mind this uninvolved member somehow
"resembles" another member.
As for newbies discovering manual mode,(which has its purpose for some but not all things),this is a stage of growth newbies go through,resembling children who won't listen to reason. The sooner they get over it the better!
Even Nat'l Geo. photographers use aper. or shutter priority sometimes.

Since the Op's time seems so limited, it would be wise to spend a good part of it reading the darned manual and absorbing the information. Then, when still having questions to ask,the first one would be why go to UH!!