Re: Print stills question

"Mark²" <mjmorgan(lowest even number here)@cox..net> wrote in message
news:c0Qgf.7381$dv.4083@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cathy wrote:

<snip>

> >> Actually, the presense of strong light isn't the determining factor
> >> of when it is helpful. An example of this fact is snow.
> >> You could be under VERY sunny skies, but your snow pictures will
> >> often come out FAR too dark.
> >
> > Well luckily we have had no snow yet, but eventually we will get
some.
> > There is a snow mode setting on the W5. wouldn't do much good for
> > those living in Florida or CA or southern climes.
> >
> >> Remember...there is PLENTY of light. That's not the issue.
> >> The issue is the fact that your camera doesn't have any idea what
> >> it's pointing at.
> >> For all it "knows", you're pointing at a grey dress, and so it
turns
> >> the exposure value WAY down to compensate what the snow...which it
> >> assumes is a grey color that is far too bright...and therefore in
> >> need of less exposure.
> >
> > In the case I was talking about where my photos were a bit too
dark -
> > not all of them were dark. The ones which turned out ok were taken
in
> > areas of the living room where there was no light, so yes, it makes
a
> > difference.

> Yes, it does make a difference once you reach the limits of what light
the
> lens allows in, or the length of time your camera will allow your
shutter to
> remain open.

I must have been daydreaming when I wrote my above paragraph. What I
meant to say was:
The ones which turned out ok were taken in areas of the living room
where was ENOUGH light"
The ones which were a little too dark, did not have enough light.

If you've got it in full auto mode, your camera will attempt
> to compensate...until it reaches the limt of lens aperture size or
shutter
> speed duration. Once you pass those limits, it can't create more
> light--unless you crank up the ISO, which simply means your camera
will
> increase the amplification of what little light signals your sensor
picks up
> (this is a gamma increase), which is what leads to overly noisy
renditions
> in images. It might manage to present a well-exposed image, but at
the
> expense of noise as a result of the heavy gamma amplification.

Yes, you are right, but I screwed your analysis up a bit by saying the
wrong thing above.:)

> >I notice this myself, even in film cameras. If some of the
> > picture composition is a bit dark area, its going to be darker than
> > the rest of the picture.
>
> I never meant to imply that the difference of lighting WITHIN a shot
wasn't
> a problem. That's the bane of ALL photographers! -Finding light that
is
> "gentle" enough to allow shadow detail...AND highlights that are
overly
> bright (blown)....

Yes, you have to get the right balance I guess. I am pretty good at
taking outdoor photos and I even took a nice marco shot of a lady bug
which was crawling along the railing of my balcony. (I thought it was
nice anyway). I had to be quick as it looking like it was going over to
the edge of the railing. As to indoor photos with flash, I will get
better as I take more of them.(I hope). Actually, I took some indoor
photos with flash a couple of nights ago of a couple of people and they
turned out OK. I put enough lights on in my living room and took the
pictures closer to where the lights were and the photos turned out much
better this time.

> No camera can set differing levels of exposure for portions within the
same
> image in the actual exposure. They can take the sum of those values
and
> attempt a happy medium, but it's never going to be perfect in shots
> containing more contrast than the film/sensor can handle. The camera
has to
> choose what portion of the image to expose for. This is why shooting
> landscapes at mid-day is not the best plan--because the light areas
are SO
> much brighter than the shadow areas (under trees, next to boulders,
etc.)
> that you'll end up with super-bright light elements, and pitch-black
shadow
> areas. Why? -Because you only get one exposure level for the entire
scene.

Yes, I notice that bright sunshine is not always the best time to take
photos. The sun is too bright or something. Though I took a couple of
photos in part sunshine/part shade of the garden area at the front of my
apt. building and the flowers came out very nice. A lot of the shot was
in the shade.

> Some people take multiple shots, identically framed, but taken at
different
> exposure levels. Then in Photoshop, they combine the two
images...keeping
> the shadows in the image from the shot that had more exposure...and
the
> bright areas of the scene they keep from the less-exposed shot. This
is one
> of the few ways to deal with the fact that cameras only get to use one
> exposure for an entire shot.

My camera takes multi shots, but I don't think I want to try that right
now. Maybe at some later time.
I'll leave that kind of thing to the photo experts. I would be happy
just to be able take nice sharp photos with good color, and no redeye or
very little,and good exposure.

Cathy

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Canon 20d focusing issues
    ... shot with cheap glass - probably quite true, but I think the people who can ... that you weren't using the kit lens - but not "L" glass either). ... I had a problem with Camera shake - I just didn't know it at the ... For me it was summed up nicly the other day when I took some photos of my ...
    (rec.photo.digital.slr-systems)
  • Re: folly of astrophotography
    ... > that shot is quite steep. ... > problems of tracking that object during the course of the exposure ... > are subject to the camera movements setting up vibrations in the ... The mounting is everything. ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: Giving up.
    ... However, I have learned that while each of us tends to be our own strongest critic we miss producing many good to great shot because we over think the entire process. ... This takes a particular mindset and dates back to the philosophy of the classic view camera photographer with limited resources. ... Many of us tend to overuse the long end of the modern zoom lens by zooming in of the center of our attention at the moment of image capture thereby constricting the ability to compose well. ... If you are having major issues with finding the "right" exposure for a given scene, let your camera work for you. ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
  • Re: Print stills question
    ... >> often come out FAR too dark. ... >> need of less exposure. ... or the length of time your camera will allow your shutter to ... I never meant to imply that the difference of lighting WITHIN a shot wasn't ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
  • Re: Toy Test
    ... just a shot of Mich in the middle of some nasty ... place the active focus point over a darker area of Mich's facial ... under-exposure would be needed to keep the camera from lightening ... The flash was set to normal exposure. ...
    (rec.photo.digital)