What did we do wrong?

[Ducky4Disney]

HA! No one was injured in the taking of the picture!

Indy was being lunged before a lesson, I think. Of course, due to my lack of focus, it looks more violent than it was. What I meant to say in my OP was, I liked the natural *light* in the arena but my ISO was set at 100 - which produced that crappy pic. I upped the ISO in later pics but I was really green (and still am) as to how high I need it to get the right exposure without too much noise.

Here's one with an ISO of 400 (and she's not moving, go figure).

I like the mallard pic you took. I don't think it's fuzzy at all and the DoF is great. I would rather see it in a portrait view than landscape, with the duck filling the frame. The ducks head should be up at the higher 1/3 of the frame. Like this:

On a side note, I can't seem to figure out how to get to my EXIF date. I can display it in Windows or in Photoshop Elements, but I want to cut and paste it and it won't seem to let me do that. Any ideas?

D4D

 

[DizneyNutz]

That shows what I know about horses. I like the cropping of the Mallard head shot. Much improvement. I use photobucket for my photo sharing on here. In photobucket, you have the option of showing the Exif data. I then copy it there and paste it under the photo on here. On the photo with Indy all the panels appear white or light beige, there is light gray gravel and light coming in the top, it may be fooling your camera sensor like it does in a snow scene. Have you tried a shot with your exposure compensation bumped up a little to see what difference that makes instead of increasing your ISO. Try +1 to +1.5 maybe. Hey it's digital, so it's only a matter of hitting the delete button

 

[dpuck1998]

I use the opanda exif viewer. It lets you pull exif data from almost any photo in IE or windows. Just a simple right click and then you can cut and paste it. Works great

http://www.opanda.com/en/iexif/

 

[MarkBarbieri]

dpuck1998 - Be very careful when shooting a Canon DSLR in AV mode with the flash. In that mode, the camera fires the flash to expose the foreground object and then leaves the shutter open long enough to expose the background. If your foreground is well lit, this can result in overexposure of the foreground.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

So nobody responded to my picture but as luck would have it I just started reading Understanding Exposure and I think I can now explain it myself and will share so others can learn.

There's a picture just like mine on page 14 and the problem is underexposure. A way around this (though I'm not sure it could have happened in this case since my DS was so far away and up a hill from where I was standing) is to take a meter reading off the face, reframe and make the correct exposure.

I'll have to try it in a more controlled setting. I do tend to have some dark pictures in shady areas.

 

[SharonLowe]

I like the idea of discussing our bad pics. I think I can learn a lot this way.

Here's one I'll post for discussion. I took this not long after getting our Nikon D200 and I really wasn't used to changing the ISO. I wanted the natural but that induced a longer shutter speed which resulted in this pic. I have a better understanding of ISO, shutter speed, and aperture now so I'm sure I could improve on this pic now - but I have a lot more learnig to do!

This type of situation just begs for a panning shot rather than trying to freeze all the action. Give it a try and see what a nice photo you can get (takes practice though and 9 out of 10 won't work. Thank goodness for digital )

 

[mabas9395]

So nobody responded to my picture but as luck would have it I just started reading Understanding Exposure and I think I can now explain it myself and will share so others can learn.

There's a picture just like mine on page 14 and the problem is underexposure. A way around this (though I'm not sure it could have happened in this case since my DS was so far away and up a hill from where I was standing) is to take a meter reading off the face, reframe and make the correct exposure.

I'll have to try it in a more controlled setting. I do tend to have some dark pictures in shady areas.

That would have given you a better exposure of your DS, but then the sky would have been totally blown out (no color or detail in the blue sky or clouds). But that is better (IMO) of a properly exposed sky and a your DS in the dark (my DS is always in the dark, but that is another topic for another time).

The "text-book" way to expose for this "back-lit" shot would be to use the settings you used to expose for the sky and then use a fill-flash to properly expose your subjects.

More info here: http://www.usa.canon.com/dlc/controller?act=GetArticleAct&articleID=106

 

[AZ JazzyJ]

So nobody responded to my picture but as luck would have it I just started reading Understanding Exposure and I think I can now explain it myself and will share so others can learn.

There's a picture just like mine on page 14 and the problem is underexposure. A way around this (though I'm not sure it could have happened in this case since my DS was so far away and up a hill from where I was standing) is to take a meter reading off the face, reframe and make the correct exposure.

I'll have to try it in a more controlled setting. I do tend to have some dark pictures in shady areas.

This would be a good candidate for an HDR where you could shoot several shots each exposed for a different element of the photo then combined to extend the range of the sensor. You would then have a composite with proper exposure of the sky, foreground, and child. Several software programs can do HDR including Photoshop CS2 (my personal choice) and Photomatix to name a couple.

Jeff

 

[dqpowell]

Okay, here is my first bad photo...feel free to rip it apart. I think I know what went wrong.

Here is the exif info
Exposure Time = 1/200"
F Number = F1.8
Exposure Program = Aperture priority
ISO Speed Ratings = 200
Exif Version = Version 2.21
Date Time Original = 2007-08-10 22:46:24
Date Time Digitized = 2007-08-10 22:46:24
Components Configuration = YCbcr
Shutter Speed Value = 7.64 TV
Aperture Value = 1.7 AV
Exposure Bias Value = ±0EV
Metering Mode = Pattern
Flash = Flash fired, compulsory flash mode
Focal Length = 50mm

There are two primary problems with this photo. The first is that it's overexposed, and it's overexposed because it was shot in sunlight at f/1.8 and 1/200 second, at ISO 200.

The second problem is that you focused on the background instead of your subjects. Notice how sharp the bushes are, and how blurry the children are.

But contrary to what others have said, you were correct to use flash in this situation. In bright sunlight, flash can fill in the dark shadows that form under noses, chins and in eye sockets. You could make the flash look more natural if you set flash exposure compensation to -2/3 or -1 stop.

To fix the first problem (overexposure), I'd suggest shooting at around f/5.6 outdoors on a bright day in aperture priority mode, and use ISO 100.

To fix the second problem (blurry children), make sure one of the focus points in your viewfinder is on a child's face, and make sure it lights up when you engage the AF function.

Edit: One other comment about the overexposure. Metering can be tricky when you have something dark dead center in the frame (the middle child's shirt). That dark shirt can trick the meter into calling for a bit more exposure than is required. In that situation (bright, sunny day and children in light-colored clothing on the sides of the photo, easily overexposed) it might have been better to dial in a little bit of negative exposure compensation... minus a half or 2/3 stop EC. Remember, there are two exposures you can compensate for... the flash (FEC, which only varies the duration of the flash pulse) and the regular EC (which adjusts shutter speed in Av mode, aperture in Tv mode, and either/both in Program mode).

HTH,
David

 

[Master Mason]

So here is one that went wrong, I didn't think about the reflection

 

[polkadotladybug]

At least you weren't nekkid in the Jurassic Pork picture!

 

[Cricket2]

So here is one that went wrong, I didn't think about the reflection

Could a shalower DoF blur the reflection out?

 

[SharonLowe]

Could a shalower DoF blur the reflection out?

Possibly but it would still be there. The best would be to try it with a polarizer. Otherwise, kneel down and shoot up.

 

[Anewman]

Okay, here is my first bad photo...feel free to rip it apart. I think I know what went wrong.

Here is the exif info
Exposure Time = 1/200"
F Number = F1.8
Exposure Program = Aperture priority
ISO Speed Ratings = 200
Exif Version = Version 2.21
Date Time Original = 2007-08-10 22:46:24
Date Time Digitized = 2007-08-10 22:46:24
Components Configuration = YCbcr
Shutter Speed Value = 7.64 TV
Aperture Value = 1.7 AV
Exposure Bias Value = ±0EV
Metering Mode = Pattern
Flash = Flash fired, compulsory flash mode
Focal Length = 50mm

But contrary to what others have said, you were correct to use flash in this situation. In bright sunlight, flash can fill in the dark shadows that form under noses, chins and in eye sockets. You could make the flash look more natural if you set flash exposure compensation to -2/3 or -1 stop.

While I agree that fill flash is great, lets not forget that flash sync speed in many cameras would give you too slow a shutter speed for a bright sunny day shooting at ISO 200.

With the camera in AV mode set at 1.8 with ISO 200 on a bright sunny day like that, it would be almost impossible to avoid overexposure when the flash is up.

Shooting at F/5.6 as you advised would have helped of course, I am just going by the camera settings posted.

 

[dpuck1998]

While I agree that fill flash is great, lets not forget that flash sync speed in many cameras would give you too slow a shutter speed for a bright sunny day shooting at ISO 200.

With the camera in AV mode set at 1.8 with ISO 200 on a bright sunny day like that, it would be almost impossible to avoid overexposure when the flash is up.

Shooting at F/5.6 as you advised would have helped of course, I am just going by the camera settings posted.

I know it looks like a bright sunny day, but actually we are indoors....

 

[dqpowell]

While I agree that fill flash is great, lets not forget that flash sync speed in many cameras would give you too slow a shutter speed for a bright sunny day shooting at ISO 200.

The high-speed sync mode on modern Canon flashes could handle it. Serving fill duty, one doesn't need the full power of the flash anyway.

With the camera in AV mode set at 1.8 with ISO 200 on a bright sunny day like that, it would be almost impossible to avoid overexposure when the flash is up.

Not at all. I've used it in bright sun with wide apertures many times before. Of course I always have FEC set to -2/3 or -1 for this purpose.

David

 

[Anewman]

While I agree that fill flash is great, lets not forget that flash sync speed in many cameras would give you too slow a shutter speed for a bright sunny day shooting at ISO 200.

The high-speed sync mode on modern Canon flashes could handle it. Serving fill duty, one doesn't need the full power of the flash anyway.

David

Sure, I was referring to the built in flash as used in said photo. I assume sync speed maxxed out at 1/200, hence such severe overexposure. But you are correct, shutter speed can be much higher with a good flash unit.

With the camera in AV mode set at 1.8 with ISO 200 on a bright sunny day like that, it would be almost impossible to avoid overexposure when the flash is up.

Not at all. I've used it in bright sun with wide apertures many times before. Of course I always have FEC set to -2/3 or -1 for this purpose.

Again under the assumption that one is using the built in flash as with the photo in question, shutter speed will not go faster than 1/200(varies by model) regardless of FEC or not.

Bright sunny day + F/1.8 aperture + 1/200(max) shutter speed + ISO 200 = over exposed photo.