Help me with some settings

[H@rry]

I got a Nikon D40 a while back and I'm still trying to learn how to use it. I've done quite a lot of reading and I think I have a pretty good understanding of shutter and aperture. I have read Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson. The book that I'm reading now is Nature Photography by John Shaw. He recommends a setting of f16 for a lot of nature scenes so I went out in the driveway to take some test/experiment photos.

The first three were in manual mode. In this shot I metered off the tree.

The next shot I metered off the sky.

Now, the first one was at 1/60" and the second was at 1/125". I decided to split the difference and this shot was at 1/80"

Now, for comparison, this shot was taken in "P" mode where the camera makes all the decisions.

Next I shot this one in "Auto" mode.

And last, I shot one in "Landscape" mode.

Now help me people! Everything I read from experienced photographers scoffs at the "dummy modes" on the cameras. They explain that you should be able to make better decisions than the camera. That certainly makes sense to me after you learn about shutter, aperture, ISO, etc. But when I do it I usually come away thinking that I haven't been able to improve on the "dummy". Am I a "dummy"? What am I missing? Any help would be appreciated.

Thanx

 

[TitusvileSurfer]

You should skim through "Understanding Exposure" one more time. Remember where he talked about "Brother Blue Sky" and "Mr. Green Jeans"? I thought they were silly names (and they were supposed to be so you would remember them) but the lesson taught was what needs to be minded.

With the brother blue sky you meter a general distance away from the sun and keep it. You got 1/125 and I think it was the better shot.

When you metered off the tree, that is Mr. Green Jeans. Peterson says to back off -2/3 of a stop which would have given you 1/100 instead of 1/60...just a tick brighter than your sky meter shot. If the tree is going to be a predominant piece of the puzzle...and in your case the subject itself, I meter off the tree and back of -2/3 as I have found this to yield more predictable results than the sky. When you meter off the sky, you will get a (slightly) different reading depending on the sun's position. With the tree...that is not the case.

Now In the top picture, the tree is too bright and so are the clouds. In the 2nd picture the tree looks pretty good to me but the clouds are grey. Either 1/80 or 1/100 would have been just perfect IMO.

I love your experimenting. You can read all you want...and that is very importiant. After the reading you have to apply what you learned and fine tune it. My Canon 40D and your Nikon D40 may not meter exactly the same, even though physics does not vary. You also have different metering modes which will directly effect your reading. I prefer "spot" with Shutter or Aperture Priority myself. I rarely use "M" (only when I DO NOT want the exposure to change from shot to shot to shot...i.e. family portraits in the back yard or anywhere else a change of scenery could change the exposure...without the correct exposure actually changing), and haven't used "P" in years. By practicing, you will find your personal D40 nitch and become a proficient, skilled photographer. Your many annoying throw aways will gradually become rare disappointments.

For the grand prize in this series...I think I'm going to have to give it to full automatic mode and I'll tell you why it won. Automatic isn't always going to screw things up. I think it used what is called "evaluative metering" in Canon terms. It meters everything equally. What happened is that the camera metered off the tree which was too bright. It didn't know it was too bright, it just threw it in there. The camera also equally metered off the sky which was too dull. It didn't know that, it just threw it in there. Then the camera added everything together, nearly an even split between sky and tree, and took the average. Too dull + too bright = just right.

 

[TitusvileSurfer]

One other reason that S/A/P/M are so much better than the pre-set modes is that I shoot RAW. With a RAW picture, every possible combination of changes before you hit the shutter button are saved. White balance is probably the most practical example but there is an impressive list. I set all my white balance after the pictures are loaded onto my computer before I convert the *large* RAW files into more manageable Jpeg. All I worry about when shooting is my exposure, composition, depth of field, and I wait until after to fact to sweat the little stuff.

 

[H@rry]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13532438#post13532438 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by TitusvileSurfer
Now In the top picture, the tree is too bright and so are the clouds. In the 2nd picture the tree looks pretty good to me but the clouds are grey. Either 1/80 or 1/100 would have been just perfect IMO.

The third shot was at 1/80, that's where I split the difference between the metering for the sky and the tree. But do you think it's any better than the last three pics taken in "dummy mode"? I can't really see it.

I've taken some in RAW mode but I didn't really see any advantage to that either.

 

[TitusvileSurfer]

Oh you will see the advantage of RAW down the road. It really is far superior, but only if you intend to edit your pictures. In fact with RAW mode shooting...you HAVE to edit your pictures.

Now you got 1/80 when you averaged them together but the clouds are still blown out (PURE white...NO detail). Let me add up the Auto-mode shot and we will see what it picked.

"AUTO" (#5)
Aperture: f/9
Shutter: 1/320
ISO: 200

"SKY" (#2)
Aperture: f/16
Shutter: 1/125
ISO: 200

Mix and Match (If the Auto Aperture was f/16, what would it's shutter speed (in 1/3's) have been?)

Aperture: f/9 -5/3 stops = f/16
Shutter: 1/320 +5/3 stops = 1/100
ISO: 200 = 200


So, the Auto mode averaged everything together and got f/16, 1/100, ISO=200. Going back up, that is the exact exposure I would have taken off the tree with -2/3 Mr. Green Jeans!

 

[H@rry]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13532717#post13532717 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by TitusvileSurfer
So, the Auto mode averaged everything together and got f/16, 1/100, ISO=200. Going back up, that is the exact exposure I would have taken off the tree with -2/3 Mr. Green Jeans!

My point exactly!

 

[TitusvileSurfer]

You have to remember the Auto mode did have a stroke of luck. You had the picture balanced with half too bright and half too dark. The auto mode would have gotten either half of the shot by itself wrong. It will miscalculate in many, many other scenario as well. If the meter sees more than 18% grey reflection, the picture will be too bright. If the meter sees less than 18% grey reflection, the picture will be too dark. Your test was one of those rare instances where two wrongs actually did make a right. If you point your spot meter at the tree and back off -2/3, that tree WILL be right.

You should also memorize the meter reading for the palm of your hand (+1/3? +2/3?). If you can't find anything to meter off of you will always have your own skin as a backup.