I need help (again)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScoutR

Thanks Rick: I don't mind the underexposure, but I do mind the noise. In the first 2 shots the sky looks properly exposed, but there is noise in the sky too. Based on what you said I would expect the noise in the underexposed foreground. Am I missing something? or does underexposure in one area cause noise across the whole spectrum.

Wendy

---

Hi, Wendy;

The noise will be most noticeable in areas that are smooth. And I think that much of the sky is fairly dark. Areas that are "busy" tend to hide the noise, but if you look in the original at a 20x20 pixel section of the sky, and a 20x20 pixel section of the foreground, I'd expect to see similar noise.

Cheers,
Rick

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rick55

Hi, Wendy;

The noise will be most noticeable in areas that are smooth. And I think that much of the sky is fairly dark. Areas that are "busy" tend to hide the noise, but if you look in the original at a 20x20 pixel section of the sky, and a 20x20 pixel section of the foreground, I'd expect to see similar noise.

Cheers,
Rick

---

Thanks Rick: Actually I see what you mean. The exposure is really only correct for the bright clouds and actually I don't notice noise in that area. The dark grey sky and dark green grass are both underexposed and relatively smooth so they both show the noise due to the underexposure. I guess I was just thinking sky bright - should not have noise, but in this case most of the sky is not bright and is actually about the same or simalar tonal value (i think) as the grass. Makes sense. :)

Thanks again
Wendy

Hi Wendy,

I intend this to be supportive, not dismissive, but I think you're being too hard on yourself.

OK, you tried something and it didn't come out as expected, the bigger problem I preceive is that you're 'beating yourself up' too much.

On the first two, I shot some like that a few months ago; and I made a right pigs ear of it too, but I just deleted the awful ones and put aside the less bad with the intention of not repeating those mistakes. The problem with shooting into the sunlit clouds is that the dynamic range is going to be too great to get a good result from a single shot, so at least two are necessary, you have the sky exposure, now you just need the ground exposure. In this instance, due to the localised bright spot, a GND won't help a lot because you'll retain the noisy sky.

On the noise issue, what you and others have since said is true; detail will hide the noise, but the NR in ACR (if used) should more than adequately deal with iso 200 noise. On these images here, I personally don't see the noise in your shots, only in those images where others have been PP'ing off the jpg. However, you're not alone; I can remember having the same thoughts on my D5000 shots, at certain smooth intermediate sky tones, even the normal minima of 200 iso gives visible noise when viewing the RAW at 100%, but as I said, the ACR NR, coupled with inevitable downsizing to 700 - 1200 px on longest side (from about 4000) will remove it. Just remember that what you see in LR/ACR at 100% is not what we see, so don't let that dis-hearten you.

Regarding the focusing problem on recent shoots, I'd check you're on single point AF and in AF-S or AF-A, not something that's trying to either; average across more points, or that continues to re-focus as you re-frame for the shot after the half press metering/AF step. Again, what you see in LR/ACR at 100% is not what we see, if there is a focus error (at 100%), a wider radius on capture sharpening, plus a more aggressive LCE, followed by the size reduction (perhaps go a little smaller than you normally do ;) ) then a 120 - 150%, 0.4px, 2 threshold USM can all but hide such things. Just don't ask me how I know that ;) :o

For me, #3 is a shot with potential - if you demolish the farm ;)
I like the light on the cables and road, but the farm buildings behind just overcomplicate the shot, adding too many other competing elements.
The people are well placed though.
A careful clone, crop and sharpen might salvage an image you can be proud of.

Metering-wise, I have not yet tried spot, I am comfortable with shooting centre-weighted, review histogram and blinkies (shame they're on different screens :mad:) and re-shoot with EC applied if necessary. What can I say; it works for me ;)

Hope you're feeling better today, put this all behind you and move on :)

Hi Wendy,

It's possible that you missed my post referring to spot-metering; if you have, do follow it up if you get a chance. In a nutshell, spot-metering will exposed what ever you point it at as a medium gray ... so if you point it at the brightest part of the sky your going to under-expose that part by 2 to 3 stops. As a rule, if you're going to spot-meter the brightest part of the sky you then need to INCREASE the exposure by AT LEAST 2 stops.

I appologise in advance for not reading the thread in eternity.

Quote:

---

"1. Noise. these are at ISO 200 I would not expect to get so much noise. I know I can make it a bit better with PP but these are really bad and not what I am used to seeing from this camera at 200 ISO"

---

As shadow man said, you may have taken the photo on a warm day, or after many exposures. Usually, "small" grain noise should not appear in print. If you're soley look at the photos on a computer, try downsizing as David said.

Quote:

---

2. What is the best method for exposing in this kind of light. I always need help here. I've gotten into the habit of using Spot metering (it works pretty good for birds and flowers, but not sure about this type of scene) and that's what I used here. "Generally" I try to expose for the brightest part then adjust if required to eliminate blinkies.

---

My method is probably far from ideal but HDR bracketing is what I use for such situations (static objects). Even without a tripod, I can get sharp results using PS's align algorithum. FYI GUI proposed a better software for this use. Colin and many other pros would usually recommend ND filters. For really dynamic scenes, they would probably recommend some form of HDR, but ND filters come first.

Quote:

---

3. Don't even worry about the focus. Something is wrong with the camera OR I've changed something and I don't know what. I'm working on that. The last 3 outings, the camera does not seem to be focusing properly. Again I don't know if its an adjustment gone wrong or the camera is malfunctioning. Just imagine the they are in focus. :o

---

It is possible that there is poor contact betwen the lens and body, so try to clean that. For more information, read this up.
Autofocus troubleshooting by Thom Hogan

I think #3 is sooo good. It is absolutely wonderful. As for spot metering, I have a partial meter and I'm partial to not even using it. I use it as a starting point and then take a pic and look at it.
Best invention in the world, a histogram and if you have a colour one even better because reds and oranges and yellows are a bit of a guess otherwise. cheers :)

Quote:

---

From Dave:
In this instance, due to the localised bright spot, a GND won't help a lot because you'll retain the noisy sky.

---

Yes, I was thinking about this last night and came to the same conclusion, but was not absolutely sure. I'm glad that at least in theory I am understanding. :)

Quote:

---

Just remember that what you see in LR/ACR at 100% is not what we see, so don't let that dis-hearten you.

---

The thing is the last 3 times I was out I have not been happy with the results. Focus is off Noise is very obvious and worse than what I am used to seeing in the past. I am not sure what is going on, but I think having to fool around trying to get the focus right is throwing off my routine. :o

Quote:

---

Regarding the focusing problem on recent shoots, I'd check you're on single point AF and in AF-S or AF-A, not something that's trying to either; average across more points, or that continues to re-focus as you re-frame for the shot after the half press metering/AF step.

---

I think you may be right, and I hope you are. It's quite possible that I had changed to AF-C when I was trying to get some action shots of birds in flight. I can't say for sure because I changed everything around last night and don't remember where I started. :( I've made sure it now set at Single point AF-S. I will check it out later today and see if the focus problem is solved.

Quote:

---

Metering-wise, I have not yet tried spot, I am comfortable with shooting centre-weighted, review histogram and blinkies (shame they're on different screens :mad:) and re-shoot with EC applied if necessary. What can I say; it works for me ;)

---

Basically, I'm just experimenting with everything and trying to get a routine for each setting. Spot metering makes sense to me because I am deciding where to meter, and then try to make the adjsutments based on that and not have to try to figure out what the camera is metering. I thought I was doing pretty good until recently. I'm thinking it works better for closeups or single subject shots though.
For instance I usually pick the point I am going to expose for - try to figure out if it is lighter or darker than medium grey +EC if lighter -EC if darker then recompose and focus for the whole shot. Now when I go to refocus it's not working, so I ditz around with the focus controls and am probably loosing all my exposure settings. I know excuses excuses. :o

Quote:

---

Hope you're feeling better today, put this all behind you and move on :)

---

Yes, I always feel better if I learn something from my mishaps, and thanks to everyone here I always manage to learn. I do wish I had done better though. The light was so nice. I've copied all the notes on how to fix these shots, so I'll see what I can salvage.

As always, thanks for your time and patience.
Wendy

Quote:

---

From BlazingFire
My method is probably far from ideal but HDR bracketing is what I use for such situations (static objects). Even without a tripod, I can get sharp results using PS's align algorithum. FYI GUI proposed a better software for this use. Colin and many other pros would usually recommend ND filters. For really dynamic scenes, they would probably recommend some form of HDR, but ND filters come first.

---

Interesting to know HDR can be tried without a tripod. I'm not sure if I would get anything that PS's algorithims could line up, but I didn't even think it would be possible.

Quote:

---

It is possible that there is poor contact betwen the lens and body, so try to clean that. For more information, read this up.
Autofocus troubleshooting by Thom Hogan

---

Thanks for the troubleshooting link. I have changed some settings and will be trying again today. If the problem persists the troubleshooting link will be a big help. I'll run the tests, but if it needs cleaning it goes to the shop, it's not something I want to try myself.

Thanks again
Wendy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colin Southern

Hi Wendy,

It's possible that you missed my post referring to spot-metering; if you have, do follow it up if you get a chance. In a nutshell, spot-metering will exposed what ever you point it at as a medium gray ... so if you point it at the brightest part of the sky your going to under-expose that part by 2 to 3 stops. As a rule, if you're going to spot-meter the brightest part of the sky you then need to INCREASE the exposure by AT LEAST 2 stops.

---

I didn't miss it Colin. I get it in theory, and even in practice when everything is slow and I have lots of time. Then something happens and I panic :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScoutR

I didn't miss it Colin. I get it in theory, and even in practice when everything is slow and I have lots of time. Then something happens and I panic :rolleyes:

---

A bit like me when a good-looking girl says "Hello handsome" *** cough cough / choke choke ***! :eek:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScoutR

... Then something happens and I panic

---

... and that's a confidence thing. You know you can do it. You've done it already. And you just need to keep telling yoruself that you can do it all the time.

I notice that this is a long thread and most of technical, shooting into the sun and exposure matters have been covered. I'm just catching up havinbg been in London for the weekend.

That one of the undulating roadway and the wires on the poles is just, in my opinion, a whisker away from being brilliant. Is that close-by you? Are you able to re-visit the location? If so, there's an amazing shot waitihng for you there.

Quote:

---

That one of the undulating roadway and the wires on the poles is just, in my opinion, a whisker away from being brilliant. Is that close-by you? Are you able to re-visit the location? If so, there's an amazing shot waitihng for you there.

---

Thanks Donald: I went back today, but it looks pretty ordinary without the dramatic light. It's not too far away though, so I will watch the weather and if we have another storm brewing type of day, I will be back to try again.

Wendy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScoutR

Thanks Arith: I think I could live with the road shot if it any part of it was even slightly in focus. :( . I'm glad you like it though - you should get a car or a bike. :)

---

I'm not allowed to drive Wendy since I was run over once, however I've already driven a million miles and even flown an airplane :eek: aircraft. Not many of those around lately :D