and please use their services
Where have I gone wrong this time?
- Thread starter new2me
- Start date
- Messages
- 1,841
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I think you need to read up a little about use of aperture and also about hyperfocal distances. At F4.5 you get a shallow depth-of-field which means quite a lot of the picture is out of focus, and also I'm guessing that this lens doesn't perform very well at 4.5 judging from the softness.
For landscapes you generally want maximum depth of field whilst retaining maximum image quality - if you stop down too much the picture will get soft due to diffraction.
For landscapes you generally want maximum depth of field whilst retaining maximum image quality - if you stop down too much the picture will get soft due to diffraction.
- Messages
- 6,729
- Name
- Jim
- Edit My Images
- Yes
One is badly under exposed the brighter one (even though it was a third of a stop brighter) is still a tad under exposed,
The f4.5 aperture is actually ok because focusing on something so far away (150m or more) will mean everything from around 60m and beyond will be in focus.
THey don't look like paintings to me at all. The details in the image are all pretty small though so maybe that's why you think that?
There is nothing of interest in the foreground so move a bit closer and wider if you need toi
The f4.5 aperture is actually ok because focusing on something so far away (150m or more) will mean everything from around 60m and beyond will be in focus.
THey don't look like paintings to me at all. The details in the image are all pretty small though so maybe that's why you think that?
There is nothing of interest in the foreground so move a bit closer and wider if you need toi
- Messages
- 1,841
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Well I find it distracting that the foreground is out of focus - as well as not so interesting. I think its the softness which attributes to 'painting like'
- Messages
- 23,200
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- No
You're a very good painter
Major problem is the second one is badly under exposed. You've dialled in -1.3 after fitting a polariser
And why did you use spot metering? It's tricky unless you know exactly what you're doing. Try matrix.
I would also bump the ISO to 200, push the f/number up, and drop the shutter speed - you don't need 1/1000sec but a bit more depth of field would be handy.
Did you rotate the polariser for best effect? It doesn't seem to be doing much to the sky, but it's taken some reflection off the water, making it even darker. Polas often do that, not always a good thing.
Major problem is the second one is badly under exposed. You've dialled in -1.3 after fitting a polariser
And why did you use spot metering? It's tricky unless you know exactly what you're doing. Try matrix.I would also bump the ISO to 200, push the f/number up, and drop the shutter speed - you don't need 1/1000sec but a bit more depth of field would be handy.
Did you rotate the polariser for best effect? It doesn't seem to be doing much to the sky, but it's taken some reflection off the water, making it even darker. Polas often do that, not always a good thing.
OP
new2me
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 6,925
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Thanks for the feedback. It's nice to see a difference in opinions. The girlfriend actually likes the painting effect
To be fair, I was rattling off various shots while she was visiting someone, so I didn't really stop to think about what I was doing, or why I was changing settings.
Through the viewer, the polariser did look like it made a difference, but I understand that the sun being almost overhead wasn't ideal but in fact, detrimental. Hands up, I don't know why I dialed in -1.3 instead of a poisitve value; am I right in thinking you always need positive exposure compensation with a polariser, or does it depend on the situation?
I have got into the habit of using spot metering and didn't think of changing that
I haven't had much of a chance to get into such wide open spaces in good weather and was initially interested in testing how sharp this lens was ... sharper than me, obviously :bonk:
To be fair, I was rattling off various shots while she was visiting someone, so I didn't really stop to think about what I was doing, or why I was changing settings.
Through the viewer, the polariser did look like it made a difference, but I understand that the sun being almost overhead wasn't ideal but in fact, detrimental. Hands up, I don't know why I dialed in -1.3 instead of a poisitve value; am I right in thinking you always need positive exposure compensation with a polariser, or does it depend on the situation?
I have got into the habit of using spot metering and didn't think of changing that
I haven't had much of a chance to get into such wide open spaces in good weather and was initially interested in testing how sharp this lens was ... sharper than me, obviously :bonk:
- Messages
- 23,200
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- No
Thanks for the feedback. It's nice to see a difference in opinions. The girlfriend actually likes the painting effect
To be fair, I was rattling off various shots while she was visiting someone, so I didn't really stop to think about what I was doing, or why I was changing settings.
Through the viewer, the polariser did look like it made a difference, but I understand that the sun being almost overhead wasn't ideal but in fact, detrimental. Hands up, I don't know why I dialed in -1.3 instead of a poisitve value; am I right in thinking you always need positive exposure compensation with a polariser, or does it depend on the situation?
I have got into the habit of using spot metering and didn't think of changing that
I haven't had much of a chance to get into such wide open spaces in good weather and was initially interested in testing how sharp this lens was ... sharper than me, obviously :bonk:
Sun overhead is perfect for a polariser. To find out where the area of darkest blue will be, make a 'gun' out of your forefinger and thumb at 90 degrees. Point at the sun and rotate your finger, and your thumb will scribe an arc where the polarisied zone is.
If the sun is directly overhead, then in this case your thumb will point to the horizon, and that's where the darkest blue will be, all around a full 360 degrees. Then rotate the filter and set it for maximum effect as seen through the viewfinder.
The other angle to remember is 33 degrees for reflections. Between 30-40 degress to the surface is close enough and again if you rotate the filter for max effect, reflections will completely disappear. With seascapes etc the water is often close to this angle and since the sea takes a lot of its colour from a reflection of the sky, it can often go very dark.
Another thing with beach pictures - a polariser will take the shine off suntanned skin, making people look a bit like putty, so use with care
I use matrix (Canon evaluative) metering almost all the time, and adjust with compensation if necessary. It's generally very reliable. Only use spot if you understand the implications of 18/15/12% grey, but if you don't it will get you into trouble.
Thanks Hoppy, lots of stuff I didn't know in that!Sun overhead is perfect for a polariser. To find out where the area of darkest blue will be, make a 'gun' out of your forefinger and thumb at 90 degrees. Point at the sun and rotate your finger, and your thumb will scribe an arc where the polarisied zone is.
If the sun is directly overhead, then in this case your thumb will point to the horizon, and that's where the darkest blue will be, all around a full 360 degrees. Then rotate the filter and set it for maximum effect as seen through the viewfinder.
The other angle to remember is 33 degrees for reflections. Between 30-40 degress to the surface is close enough and again if you rotate the filter for max effect, reflections will completely disappear. With seascapes etc the water is often close to this angle and since the sea takes a lot of its colour from a reflection of the sky, it can often go very dark.
Another thing with beach pictures - a polariser will take the shine off suntanned skin, making people look a bit like putty, so use with care
OP
new2me
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 6,925
- Edit My Images
- Yes
+1Thanks Hoppy, lots of stuff I didn't know in that!
One more point
I was actually (foolishly, experimentally) in manual mode for those shots, which means I wasn't actually using spot metering afterall?
no need to answer that ... it's just clicked
Last edited:
- Messages
- 11,202
- Name
- Garry
- Edit My Images
- No
The first one definitely looks like a painting to me. When my shots turn out like this it's usually because the sun is almost overhead so everything is well lit with very little shadow. Looks like that might be true of this one, too.