Posts for: SalvageDiver
Oct 19, 2017 22:44:45 #
Thanks for looking. I agree with you about the lives and livelyhoods destroyed by the fires. I've seen first hand the destruction that out-of-control fires can cause. SAD..
suci wrote:
Indeed beautiful, but it's also sad to have all those fires destroying a lot of people's lives.
Oct 19, 2017 22:41:38 #
Thanks for looking. Glad to hear from another construction diver. My work was done in the military back in the 70's, then on to other things in life.
Geezer wrote:
Excellent!! 
Moro Rock especially..... 
Now that I've retired from being a Construction Diver, I'm happy to be on dry land now, and spend more time taking pictures.
Moro Rock especially..... Now that I've retired from being a Construction Diver, I'm happy to be on dry land now, and spend more time taking pictures.
Oct 19, 2017 16:35:58 #
This is my first post since joining a few days ago. This week, my wife and I made several trips out to Joshua Tree for hiking and looking for the Real Hall of Horrors. On one of the days, the onshore winds blew the smoke and ash from the Orange County canyon fires over the desert creating some beautiful and colorful sunsets. Last year, the smoke and ash from the coastal fires above LA blew across the state and into Sequoia NP also creating some spectacular sunsets. Here are a couple of photos of those sunsets resulting from the fires.
Oct 16, 2017 18:51:33 #
Oct 16, 2017 12:39:25 #
Oct 15, 2017 18:46:44 #
I think rjaywallace has the right idea, i.e. exposure triangle. Your exif data shows f-stop=5, exposure=1/1250 at ISO 200 with auto WB and shutter speed priority. I suspect these settings were not enough to get a good exposure and just produced an underexposed image. With the exposure and ISO set, only the aperture can change. For your lens at 165mm, the aperture of f5 is likely wide open and can't open any further.
To estimate an adequate exposure, I go back to the sunny 16 rule for overcast days, i.e. f/8 @ 1/ISO. Using your shutter speed and ISO, you would need an f-stop between 2.8 and 4. A shutter speed = 1/600s or ISO=400 would likely have returned a good exposure and possibly a good white balance.
Even on cloudy days, the ambient light can change rapidly, requiring changes in exposure settings.
To estimate an adequate exposure, I go back to the sunny 16 rule for overcast days, i.e. f/8 @ 1/ISO. Using your shutter speed and ISO, you would need an f-stop between 2.8 and 4. A shutter speed = 1/600s or ISO=400 would likely have returned a good exposure and possibly a good white balance.
Even on cloudy days, the ambient light can change rapidly, requiring changes in exposure settings.
Oct 15, 2017 18:44:38 #
I think rjaywallace has the right idea, i.e. exposure triangle. Your exif data shows f-stop=5, exposure=1/1250 at ISO 200 with auto WB and shutter speed priority. I suspect these settings were not enough to get a good exposure and just produced an underexposed image. With the exposure and ISO set, only the aperture can change. For your lens at 165mm, the aperture of f5 is likely wide open and can't open any further.
To estimate an adequate exposure, I go back to the sunny 16 rule for overcast days, i.e. f/8 @ 1/ISO. Using your shutter speed and ISO, you would need an f-stop between 2.8 and 4. A shutter speed = 1/600s or ISO=400 would likely have returned a good exposure and possibly a good white balance.
Even on cloudy days, the ambient light can change rapidly, requiring changes in exposure settings.
To estimate an adequate exposure, I go back to the sunny 16 rule for overcast days, i.e. f/8 @ 1/ISO. Using your shutter speed and ISO, you would need an f-stop between 2.8 and 4. A shutter speed = 1/600s or ISO=400 would likely have returned a good exposure and possibly a good white balance.
Even on cloudy days, the ambient light can change rapidly, requiring changes in exposure settings.
Oct 15, 2017 18:10:22 #
Hi Folks,
I'm introducing myself after lurking here for awhile. I'm a retired engineer and have been involved in photography, only as a hobby, since the early 70's. I did take some college courses in photography back in the film days. I do remember the smell of processing chemicals on my fingers and the feel of hanging wet paper, but haven't touched the stuff since the advent of digital. I took a break from serious photography while focusing on family and career. Both have grown up now and doing just fine so now I'm back to playing with an old hobby. I have many interest in photography, but I find that I'm using photography as an excuse to travel. My wife and I do a lot of hiking so, as you can imagine, I shoot a lot of landscapes and wildlife along with a lot of personal snapshots. I've been reading this forum for awhile, sometimes with amusement, and have learned a lot from the many talented people that participate here. So rather than continue lurking, I've decided to join in some of the conversations.
Mike
I'm introducing myself after lurking here for awhile. I'm a retired engineer and have been involved in photography, only as a hobby, since the early 70's. I did take some college courses in photography back in the film days. I do remember the smell of processing chemicals on my fingers and the feel of hanging wet paper, but haven't touched the stuff since the advent of digital. I took a break from serious photography while focusing on family and career. Both have grown up now and doing just fine so now I'm back to playing with an old hobby. I have many interest in photography, but I find that I'm using photography as an excuse to travel. My wife and I do a lot of hiking so, as you can imagine, I shoot a lot of landscapes and wildlife along with a lot of personal snapshots. I've been reading this forum for awhile, sometimes with amusement, and have learned a lot from the many talented people that participate here. So rather than continue lurking, I've decided to join in some of the conversations.
Mike