Gary Truchelut Loc: Coldspring, TX

Nice work and welcome to a great place to learn

yaterman96 Loc: Southern North Carolina

Reverse grad ND filter is the way to go with live view. They are $$$$$ but worth every penny

sshinn1 Loc: Phoenix

Yes I agree with these, not much detail needed in the foreground, but I was experimenting with some and trying to get more detail out with shadow recovery, at least now I think I will have a better idea how when there is something interesting

sshinn1 Loc: Phoenix

Nice photos! Any particular reason you chose f5.6? My method was shoot manual @f8, meter the sky away from the sun ( I read this in the Bryan Peterson book I saw recommended so many time here), and then I fired off 5 shot brackets. Next time I think I will simply set my brackets for normal and 1 and 2 stops under since every shot taken over was a throw away.

sshinn1 Loc: Phoenix

Thanks :thumbup:

sshinn1 Loc: Phoenix

Those look interesting, more than I want to spend to just play around with but maybe one day...

sshinn1 Loc: Phoenix

Makes sense - thanks for the advice!

Chinaman Loc: Adelaide, South Australia, Australia

Well done sshinn1. They are beautiful scenes and you composed them well. As a set of images, they nicely illustrate the rising sun and strength of the light at different stages - from dark to light. If you look at them individually, maybe a tad lighter for the first 2 just to show the foreground a bit more - as in the 3rd shot. Either increase exposure by half or one stop at the taking stage or increase brightness in a photoeditor. Why do you want to mess around with a ND filter? The sunrise is very fleeting and you can miss the whole show. You shot beautifully without it so you don't need it under the same conditions. Yes, if you have a cloudless sky and it is very bright and the foreground is still in deep shadows.
Welcome by the way.

georgevedwards Loc: Essex, Maryland.

The last one looks best, even though you lost the sun behind the clouds, there is beautiful detail in the shadows whereas in the others the darks are flat because the camera has underexposed because the sun Is so bright. It is a tricky problem, maybe more unique to digital more than the old film cameras. This is why I am so intrigued with the HDR process, you actually take different pictures, one for correct highlight and one for correct shadows. The computer software takes the best from each and blends it with the "normal" exposure, which has lost detail in the highlights and shadows. The photographic process always seem to "average" all the tones, never getting the extremes right. Another way is do what made Ansel Adams' pictures so great. He was the master of dodging and burning. Photoshop (the full versions) have a great dodging and burning tool that Ansel would have given his eyeteeth for. You can adjust the size of the tool to do large areas or small details. You can harden or soften the edge to the area affected, you can adjust the intensity from 1 to a 100. Using the low end of 1-5 can make carefully built up adjustments that can transform an OK photo into a great one. Or maybe I just need that $6000 dollar D4.

sshinn1 Loc: Phoenix

Thanks for the comments, I appreciate it. I was pleased with these results, and hadn't really thought of a ND filter until mentioned here, might just be something to play with. I bracketed all my shots to give myself some room for error with exposure, #3 was fairly easy to get more detail in the foreground using shadow recovery in Lightroom, but I couldn't get the same result in #1 and still keep the detail/color in the sky - I may play around with it some more.

stevenkl Loc: Swainsboro,GA

Hi Steve: This may sway my decision to get that camera...

sshinn1 Loc: Phoenix

Thanks for the tips, it's appreciated. I don't have Photoshop, just Lightroom for now. I do see what your saying about the darks being "flat", I think I like it this way in #1 but in looking at them again I think #2 could be improved - #2 and #3 were actually very similar exposure wise, but in #2 I darkened the blacks and the shadows to get more of a silhouette look, and in #3 I left the blacks alone and used shadow recovery, I may play around with #2 later when I get home.

I bet the D4 would solve all these problems... but for $6k I better be able to drive it to the location also!

RaydancePhoto

I carry a Cokin square graduated filter in my back pocket. If I need it, I just hold it in front of the lens, tight against the lens, works fine and is fast to use. I have the adapters to mount them but I never use them.

big-guy Loc: Peterborough Ontario Canada

#2 of 2 (#3 by this threads standard) really caught my senses. Felt I was looking at the aftermath of a great battle. Caught myself straining to see the dead and dying in the shadows. Great shot, hang it proudly over the couch. :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

RealBohemian Loc: Toronto

[quote=sshinn1]two more[/qu

Steve what was the set up for #3? It look like you washed out foreground in post processing, everything at front is pale and unsharp,or whatever you did,maybe high ISO ?. Just curies, since i don't end up with photos like that with my D7100, and you know you don't have to spend money on ND filter, just use tripod and proper speed and aperture.