PDA

View Full Version : Virga Rain/Snow At Sunset



David Stephens
11-25-2013, 01:48 PM
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8060/8276573232_ea759e19a4_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/dcstep/8276573232/)
Virga rain/snow at sunset (http://www.flickr.com/photos/dcstep/8276573232/) by dcstep (http://www.flickr.com/people/dcstep/), on Flickr

This is atmospheric because I used a long focal length to compress a lot of miles here. Those are the Rocky Mountains behind the virga (virga is rain that doesn't hit the ground, which is common in the low humidity of Colorado). The sky above the rain/snow was very dark and showed little detail, but the precipitation provided the real interest. I think of it more as a study of light than a landscape image.

Canon 5D MkIII, EF 500mm f/4L IS, EF 1.4x TC, Av Mode, ISO 800, +4/3EV, f/8, resulting in 1/640-sec. with Raw conversion in DxO OPtics Pro.

dankearl
11-25-2013, 08:00 PM
I like it except the highlights are way too bright and overwhelm the image.
I think had you shot in manual instead of AV, you could have controlled them better.
I would always shoot manual, especially for Landscape, where you set up and control what you want to photograph.

David Stephens
11-25-2013, 10:17 PM
Interesting concept Dan. Please explain how shooting manual would have "controlled (highlights) better."

dankearl
11-25-2013, 10:22 PM
We'll, let's see, if you looked into the viewfinder and focused on the sun, you would have seen that you needed to decrease exposure.
The A mode will not do that.
Also, had you checked the highlights after one shot, you would have seen blinkers and decreased exposure on the next.
Thanks for asking.
Pretty basic photography "concept".

David Stephens
11-25-2013, 10:37 PM
We'll, let's see, if you looked into the viewfinder and focused on the sun, you would have seen that you needed to decrease exposure.
The A mode will not do that.
Also, had you checked the highlights after one shot, you would have seen blinkers and decreased exposure on the next.
Thanks for asking.
Pretty basic photography "concept".

There's nothing that I can't do in Av mode on this shot. In fact I raised EV to get this where I wanted it, to +4/3EV. That wasn't an accident. I respect your opinion that you don't like where I chose to expose it, but I exposed it to show the diffused sun coming through the virga rain/snow. Tell me you don't like my exposure choice, but don't tell me how to operate the camera. Av provides every bit as much control in a relatively static situation like this. I use manual when there's an ambiguous background, like a BIF against broken clouds, with white clouds, dark clouds, blue sky and the bird moving between the BGs could cause an bad meter reading. Nothing was moving real fast here, or in most landscapes that I take. My 1960 Yashica 44 wouldn't allow Av mode, so I shot manual, but I paid a lot for my modern meter and believe in using it. My "blinkies" are turned on and I look at them and the histogram when shooting. I avoid blowing out "important highlights", but I don't obsess over highlights that I don't consider important.

dankearl
11-25-2013, 10:48 PM
Sorry you seem offended by my opinion, but if you want to shoot in av mode and you don't think manual (which is the mode every single professional photographer uses), is the more correct mode to use, then feel free........

David Stephens
11-25-2013, 11:17 PM
Sorry you seem offended by my opinion, but if you want to shoot in av mode and you don't think manual (which is the mode every single professional photographer uses), is the more correct mode to use, then feel free........

I'm not offended by your opinion, I just think it's absolute BS. Which survey gave you that valuable tidbit about "every single professional photographer"? I think you're making stuff up.

You throw around terms like "correct mode" and "better control" as if you know what you're talking about, yet you seem to have no basis for your opinion. Maybe you're just prone to exaggeration.

Don Railton
11-25-2013, 11:30 PM
hi David. Interesting shot, the image looks more like fire and smoke than rain... I agree with Dan in that I think the bright bits are a bit too hot IMHO... Like the inclusion of blue sky and the tree outlines in the foreground.

DON

dankearl
11-25-2013, 11:51 PM
Hey David, nice tone....
You go do a survey for me , OK, you go interview pro photographers, find those who shoot anything in aperture mode and get back to us...
I was attempting to be helpful, sorry, in fact you don't need to ask pro's, you can probably ask 99% of the people who post at BPN and ask them which mode they think will get the best results....., but you go ahead and do what you want.

David Stephens
11-26-2013, 12:05 AM
Nice tone Dan. I see you're full of yourself and ready to pontificate. Go ahead.

Daniel Cadieux
11-26-2013, 08:35 AM
Guys, please play nice. Refer to Guidelines 11, 15, 16, and especially 25. Both manual and AV are good tools when in good hands. In fact, Artie himself uses AV on many of his images (just check the techs on his blog images) and I did so until recently (and still am comfortable with it when I use it). Manual is also excellent in most, if not all situations for those comfortable with it.

Anyways, its fine to disagree but just be respectful about it guys...:c3:

David Stephens
11-26-2013, 10:39 AM
hi David. Interesting shot, the image looks more like fire and smoke than rain... I agree with Dan in that I think the bright bits are a bit too hot IMHO... Like the inclusion of blue sky and the tree outlines in the foreground.

DON

I'm traveling now, but I did look at the Historgram and tried pulling highlights down in the JPEG and that does look pretty good. When I return, I'll reprocess the Raw file to show a little more detail in the bright areas, to see how that looks.

Thanks for the thoughtful suggestion.

Diane Miller
11-26-2013, 01:11 PM
I think the colors and mystical look you caught here wonderful! You're right -- it's about light! You captured great texture in the "mist" but I think it would be a good exercise to compare a version with the highlights toned down just a bit. I'm not familiar with DxO Optics Pro but I've heard good things about it. I'd bet that the highlights are fully recoverable here, with the flexibility of modern RAW processors.

No matter what mode I'm shooting in, if the subject is sitting still for me I rely on the histogram and the blinkies (even though they are from a JPEG) as my light meter. It's often a balancing act between the two ends of the tonal range. At ISO 800 I wouldn't want to have to lighten the darks very much in order to find the wonderful detail there.

David Stephens
11-26-2013, 02:54 PM
Thank you Diane. DxO, like LR, has Shadows and Highlights sliders, along with Blacks and MIdtones, making this a very simple adjustment. I toyed with the JPEG just a minute last night and the result was promising. Given the high ISO, I want to go back to the Raw file before I repost.

Sorry to say, work and holiday are getting in the way of me reworking the file. It'll be next week before I have some time.

Anette Mossbacher
11-26-2013, 03:40 PM
Hi David,

am not talking about the Highlights, all said already. What I wonder is when the FG ( Foreground) is darkened a tad more. Looks like clouds, but might can bring a bit more into the image.

Have a great trip

Ciao
Anette

David Stephens
11-26-2013, 06:53 PM
Hi David,

am not talking about the Highlights, all said already. What I wonder is when the FG ( Foreground) is darkened a tad more. Looks like clouds, but might can bring a bit more into the image.

Have a great trip

Ciao
Anette

Ciao Anette and thanks for the travel wishes.

I'll try that when I reprocess. I could lower blacks to reduce detail in the tree. There's an ambiguous element in the very front of the FG. It looks like more clouds, but might really be OOF grasses. I may crop most of that out.

Thanks for all the ideas.

Diane Miller
11-26-2013, 11:32 PM
Not sure I'd crop from the bottom, but maybe a gradient with some subtle darkening about halfway up the trees.

Lots to play with here in a great image! And plenty of time to do so -- have a great Thanksgiving holiday, everyone! (Even those who don't celebrate it -- every day is worthy of celebration!) I might finish digesting by Monday.

Andrew McLachlan
11-27-2013, 04:56 PM
Hi David, my only nit is with the brightest areas...I'd love to see a repost when time allows you to rework.

Dan K, I use aperture priority on my D800 frequently :S3:

And to reiterate Daniel's words...disagree, but do so politely please.

Roman Kurywczak
11-29-2013, 10:21 PM
Hey David,

I've seen all the responses and agree the tone of everyone involved could have been better. As far as people using AV mode for landscape photography.......I'm going with Dan.....although there is no "correct" mode for photography. If you look closely at the specs of the premiere landscape photographers......they use manual mode. AV can work.....but my question is why? I see you dialed in compensation....wouldn't it be just as easy to go to M....check your histogram and take the shot? How do you take a landscape when the FG and sky....at sunrise or sunset are that far divergent in exposure? I want to know your basis for sticking to AV mode and while I agree with your BIF philosophy regarding mode.....I want more of an explanation when it comes to landscapes. This is not an attack or anything meant to be disrespectful.....just want to know and share your reasoning.

Roman Kurywczak
11-29-2013, 11:32 PM
BTW....I realize that I didn't critique the image.....so here goes. Brightness.....mentioned...layers I really like. Perhaps a bit more right with the camera to put the highest peak more in the rot position. I am a firm believer of getting it right in camera.....no matter what mode so if you tell me you use AV....and get it right....go for it.....but it better be from a landscape guy and look at the portfolio.......otherwise.....

This site was supposedly built on honest critiques.....if you promote someones philosophy who doesn't have the goods to back it up.....then the inevitable will happen. While I believe Dan's tone was harsh and a bit tough originally...his assesment wasn't wrong. Your response was equally harsh and made excuses....so if you want to really improve.....look at Dan's advice without ego or malice.....you will see it is correct. Pointing to a non landscape photographer as a correct way to approach this genre......is not the way to go. Respectfully....Roman

David Stephens
11-30-2013, 01:02 AM
I have no idea what you're talking about Roman.

Roman Kurywczak
11-30-2013, 09:31 AM
OK 1/ Why did you choose AV in the first place? 2. Was your original capture blown out in the highlight areas?

David Stephens
11-30-2013, 01:44 PM
OK 1/ Why did you choose AV in the first place? 2. Was your original capture blown out in the highlight areas?

I chose Av mode because it gives me complete control over the exposure. I set my aperture first and ISO second. I needed a relatively high SS because I was hand holding 700mm of focal length. I observe SS in the VF. I added +EV because there were a lot of dark areas that I wanted detail in and I considered that more important than the highlight areas. I got the detail that I wanted in the highlights and there's plenty more to recover.

David Stephens
11-30-2013, 07:20 PM
Your turn Roman. How would using M have changed anything?

David Stephens
12-01-2013, 12:41 PM
BTW, I forgot to mention, I like being able to select +-EV by spinning the wheel on the back of the body. I tend to ETTR, but I react to the image DR and potential for blown highlights and/or over saturated blacks. It's easy to respond to these situations with the EV-wheel.

Roman Kurywczak
12-02-2013, 11:04 AM
David, realize I use M mode.....as do most other working landscape pros to get the correct exposure. If you had blown highlights....then exposure wasn't correct. If I was in Manual mode....I would check for the brightest area....then check the FG....whip out a GND filter and take the shot. Similar/same FG without a blown sky. Or....you can take 2 images....and either use software or manually blend them. There is no right or wrong mode.....but manual forces me to look at the histogram.....take all factors into account.....then choose how I want to proceed....either with filters or blending. Since the sky was blown out....you could just as easily say that is the look you are going for.....and that would also be correct. Just wondering on the thought process as I don't see dialing in compensation as easier.

David Stephens
12-02-2013, 11:29 AM
I don't think that a GND would have worked here, given the distribution of highlights within the dark area, it would have made them too dark. As for HDR, that's an option that I could consider.

I disagree with the presumption that a blown highlight is a "fail." I consider HDR vs. blowing "important" highlights or lost shadow detail and sometimes chose a poison that might upset a fellow photographer, but could be perfectly permissible to a buyer.

Anyway, you didn't demonstrate how M is preferable to Av. I don't think that you can because they both provide the same data and control, just the control mechanism is slightly different. Some people can be extremely dogmatic about these things, but I think that any mode that provides the photographer with adequate control and the tools to access the situation will work just as well.

Roman Kurywczak
12-02-2013, 12:35 PM
I know a reverse GND would have worked.....but we are going in circles here. It is your choice as the artist to listen or not listen and take the image as you see it.....so it has become obvious you do not want a critique....so I will give you none from now on.

David Stephens
12-02-2013, 03:31 PM
Oh, the ole "take my ball and go home if you don't play like I like" game.

I've enjoyed the critique here and plan to re-process the image and re-post soon, as I stated earlier in the thread; however, there seems to be a side agenda here in support of M mode and against any other alternative. I thought that you, with you deep knowledge and the respect of many, might be able to explain the advantage of M over Av, but I still haven't seen it, or even a serious attempt, beyond, "that's what landscape guys do". Is it merely dogma, or is there substance to the position?

Roman Kurywczak
12-02-2013, 06:09 PM
No...it's more like I won't waste my precious time for people who don't want advice. Fact.....you chose AV.....and screwed your exposure up.....and now want to fix it in post processing. I can take your argument to any situation. What's dogmatic in this.... your position; that I like it so AV was correct choice. If your initial choice was correct....then you wouldn't have screwed up your exposure. I teach 1000's of people a year at lectures and tours. You are more inclined to not listen.....as your reaction dictates. Go do what you think is correct.....if you like your portfolio.....then it must work for you......nothing I say will change that.

David Stephens
12-02-2013, 08:37 PM
Here's a redo with the overall level lowered about 5-points and highlights pulled down a little. I also pulled down the blacks five-points to darken the foreground a bit. All this is pretty subtle.

To get more detail in that almost direct sun on the backs of the clouds would have required multi-shot HDR, as suggested by Roman. Roman also suggested a filter, but I think that would darkened some already dark area more.

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5550/11181513076_eeb5f3afae_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/dcstep/11181513076/)
_Z5A9901_DxO_DxO-Redo (http://www.flickr.com/photos/dcstep/11181513076/) by dcstep (http://www.flickr.com/people/dcstep/), on Flickr

dankearl
12-02-2013, 09:05 PM
Actually, the brights appear even brighter, due to the contrast difference.
That's fine, I am sure you and your family love it.
Ansel Adams himself could not give you advice, But I am sure he would have used Av had it been available.

David Stephens
12-02-2013, 10:06 PM
Dan, all I asked for is an explanation of why M is a better mode than Av. Ansel Adams would have likely answered my question, if he had recommended M-mode. You apparently can't answer the question.

dankearl
12-02-2013, 10:21 PM
David,
for the last time (the photo, sorry, was not worth this much discussion).
Roman and I both answered, you refuse to listen.
When you choose AV, it does not matter what ev you are dialing in, the camera stills selects the exposure, you don't.
The camera simply chose a faster SS to go with the exposure you dialed in.
That is how AV works.
In Manual, the photographer chooses everything, the ISO, the SS, the exposure, the camera meter simply tells him what the exposure is.
For instance, the bright spots you shot, even if you spot metered, the camera would probably get the exposure wrong.
Go shoot bright waterfalls in the sun, no camera meter can properly expose for that bright ribbon in the large scene.
The experienced photographer knows what to dial in.
The same with ducks and birds in a frame.
No camera can meter a buffleheads ducks white head, NONE.
I hope my tone is alright, I was chastised for trying to give you a critique that most photographers would agree with.
You just won't or can't get it.

David Stephens
12-02-2013, 10:40 PM
Dan, you don't seem to understand Av. The camera didn't chose anything, I chose the ISO and aperture and +-EV to get the exposure and shutter speed that I needed. I observed the SS in the VF. In Av, the camera meter simply tells me what the exposure is. I change it as needed and observe the result in the Preview screen and the Histogram. An experienced photographer knows what to dial in. In Av mode, experienced photographers know that white birds in bright sun require -EV. Brown birds and brown fur typically demand plus EV. These are the same things that the M-mode photographer knows. You just won't or can't get it.

dankearl
12-02-2013, 10:43 PM
Your photo is overexposed and the brights are hideous.
End of story.
You "observed" the SS, you did not select and you blew it.
You are either incredibly dense or just egotistic, I won't respond again.

David Stephens
12-02-2013, 11:13 PM
.. I won't respond again.

:wave:

James Shadle
12-03-2013, 09:58 AM
Your photo is overexposed and the brights are hideous.
End of story.
You "observed" the SS, you did not select and you blew it.
You are either incredibly dense or just egotistic, I won't respond again.

I'd like to remind everyone that art is subjective.
Most folks like chocolate, some don't. That fact that some folks don't like chocolate does not make it hideous.

When replying to or critiquing images it's always a good idea to submit as your opinion.

While someone may not like the aesthetics of an image, it is important to address whether or not a photographer accomplished their goal.
Like it or not, in this case the image is as the photographer intended it to be.

Diane Miller
12-03-2013, 12:19 PM
David,
for the last time (the photo, sorry, was not worth this much discussion).
Roman and I both answered, you refuse to listen.
When you choose AV, it does not matter what ev you are dialing in, the camera stills selects the exposure, you don't.
The camera simply chose a faster SS to go with the exposure you dialed in.
That is how AV works.
In Manual, the photographer chooses everything, the ISO, the SS, the exposure, the camera meter simply tells him what the exposure is.
For instance, the bright spots you shot, even if you spot metered, the camera would probably get the exposure wrong.
Go shoot bright waterfalls in the sun, no camera meter can properly expose for that bright ribbon in the large scene.
The experienced photographer knows what to dial in.
The same with ducks and birds in a frame.
No camera can meter a buffleheads ducks white head, NONE.
I hope my tone is alright, I was chastised for trying to give you a critique that most photographers would agree with.
You just won't or can't get it.


Your tone is not all right. It is all wrong, and so are your “facts.” You and Roman are making personal attacks against someone who chose to use a different method to set exposure than the one you use. And you are trying to justify your criticism of the method of exposure settings by mixing in a criticism of dynamic range issues.

In M the user sets the exposure by selecting aperture, ISO and SS. In Av a person has decided on an ISO and an aperture they would like to hold, and offsets the SS with the exposure compensation dial instead of directly. For a still subject such as a landscape, the camera is not 'selecting the exposure' any more than it is when you manually change the SS.

As pointed out above, Artie, who used to stress M exposure, often uses Av these days. It has its place, along with M and Tv.

So let’s get back to the point of making any post in this forum.

I think this is a very beautiful image, capturing some wonderful, fleeting light in a beautiful setting. If the dynamic range was too much to be recoverable in RAW conversion, then in this case I don’t think criticism can be leveled for the choice of allowing the very bright sky areas to go white. (Preferences might be stated, but there is no logical basis for flat-out criticism.) It is certainly plausible that viewing the scene directly would have resulted in squinting at those bright areas. And the exposure choice David made allowed detail in the very interesting darker areas to be recoverable without too much noise.

I think the image is well worth a civil discussion of its artistic merits and how it might best be processed after the fact.

Diane Miller
12-03-2013, 12:31 PM
And I just made an interesting observation here. I opened the image in PS to have a closer look at the bright areas (which are bright but not badly blown out) and, because I have PS set up to show profile mismatches, I see that the image was posted in AdobeRGB. I have a fully-color managed browser (which many people don't) so I was seeing the image correctly, because the profile was tagged. But people with a non-managed browser would be seeing it with incorrect colors and tonalities, as those browsers are ignoring the profile tag basically "assigning" sRGB to the image.

I should post a tutorial on how to set up Firefox to be fully managed. It is very simple, requiring about two steps.

Norm Dulak
12-03-2013, 03:52 PM
Your tone is not all right. It is all wrong, and so are your “facts.” You and Roman are making personal attacks against someone who chose to use a different method to set exposure than the one you use. And you are trying to justify your criticism of the method of exposure settings by mixing in a criticism of dynamic range issues.

In M the user sets the exposure by selecting aperture, ISO and SS. In Av a person has decided on an ISO and an aperture they would like to hold, and offsets the SS with the exposure compensation dial instead of directly. For a still subject such as a landscape, the camera is not 'selecting the exposure' any more than it is when you manually change the SS.

As pointed out above, Artie, who used to stress M exposure, often uses Av these days. It has its place, along with M and Tv.

So let’s get back to the point of making any post in this forum.

I think this is a very beautiful image, capturing some wonderful, fleeting light in a beautiful setting. If the dynamic range was too much to be recoverable in RAW conversion, then in this case I don’t think criticism can be leveled for the choice of allowing the very bright sky areas to go white. (Preferences might be stated, but there is no logical basis for flat-out criticism.) It is certainly plausible that viewing the scene directly would have resulted in squinting at those bright areas. And the exposure choice David made allowed detail in the very interesting darker areas to be recoverable without too much noise.

I think the image is well worth a civil discussion of its artistic merits and how it might best be processed after the fact.

Thanks, Diane, for injecting rationality into this discussion. I agree that this is a beautiful image, and that there is more than one way to achieve a photographic objective.

Roman Kurywczak
12-03-2013, 05:56 PM
First....I don't think I attacked David. I will tread very lightly here as I obviously disagree with your assessments. Post an image in Avian with blown highlights......you will get an immediate response. My whole argument is....just saying you like it is OK.....then there is no reason or basis for me critiquing the image....otherwise it isn't a critique forum.

Diane....you made a statement that I was attacking Mr. Stephens.....did you think his tone was correct in the thread? If you look closely at my initial response....I said that Dan was harsh and stated so. I'm sorry if I offended Mr. Stephens and will refrain from commenting on his images.

Norm Dulak
12-03-2013, 07:17 PM
I think that Diane and Capt. James are right in saying that images such as this should be evaluated in their totality. Particular elements that some may dislike may not be so objectionable to others, who may enjoy other elements and the image as a whole. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and we all view things differently.

For those who are hung up on the bright spots, there are ways to deal with them. I took David's OP into PS CS6, applied three Viveza 2 control points to the brightest spots, and used the "warming" slider. Perhaps the repost shown here will make some happier, although I'm sure much more could be done with the original file.

Anyway, I am pleased that David has shared this image with us.

Roman Kurywczak
12-03-2013, 08:35 PM
I'm surprised Capt' James didn't catch pane 35.......an added statement should be....if the BG doesn't change then the statement is correct.... AV works. If the BG is changeable......and you dialed in compensation in AV......and the bird flies from dark mangroves to blue sky and then sand and back again......AV would have messed up more than a few of the exposures. I will now let James stay off the Tums for the rest of the night .

BTW...whites/bright area look better in repost Norm.

Andrew McLachlan
12-03-2013, 08:57 PM
Diane, please let me know if you do post a tutorial on setting up Firefox...I'd be interested in giving it a read.

Norm, I like your repost best and think that using Viveza offers a viable solution to the bright highlights.

David, I do agree with Roman here that a reverse grad would have been beneficial to help hold back the brightest portions of this image.

A 'correct' exposure can be created by using manual, or Aperture priority...I use both manual and aperture priority in my landscape work and am able to achieve the correct exposure using either mode.

Don Lacy
12-04-2013, 12:23 AM
I am a little late to this discussion but I would like to make two comments that hopefully will not offend anyone. First it is obvious from Davids responses that he knew exactly what we wanted to do with the exposure of the scene you might not agree with his vision of the image but it was not a mistake created by bad technique. Second a knowledgeable photographer can use and will know which exposure mode best fits the scene and or is most conductive to creating his vision of the image be it Aperture, Tv, or Manual all three will give you the correct exposure if used properly. One last thought some might find amusing in event photography the inside joke is that the P on the dial stands for profesional or pay day.

David Stephens
12-04-2013, 12:00 PM
I think that Diane and Capt. James are right in saying that images such as this should be evaluated in their totality. Particular elements that some may dislike may not be so objectionable to others, who may enjoy other elements and the image as a whole. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and we all view things differently.

For those who are hung up on the bright spots, there are ways to deal with them. I took David's OP into PS CS6, applied three Viveza 2 control points to the brightest spots, and used the "warming" slider. Perhaps the repost shown here will make some happier, although I'm sure much more could be done with the original file.

Anyway, I am pleased that David has shared this image with us.

Thanks for your comments and thanks you for the repost. That's a nice alternative to what I displayed.

Diane Miller
12-04-2013, 06:27 PM
Andrew, thanks -- it's up -- both in ETL as a sticky and James copied it to the Tutorials forum.

It can make a variable difference, depending on the image, but at least you know you have the best shot at seeing things as they should be.

Arthur Morris
12-18-2013, 07:27 PM
We'll, let's see, if you looked into the viewfinder and focused on the sun, you would have seen that you needed to decrease exposure.
The A mode will not do that.
Also, had you checked the highlights after one shot, you would have seen blinkers and decreased exposure on the next.
Thanks for asking.
Pretty basic photography "concept".

Dan. I have read far enough to comment :). You are dead wrong. 99% of the exposure that you set manually can be duplicated in Av mode. Actually, in 99% of the situations Av mode is Manual and Manual is Av. Getting the right exposure has nothing to do with what mode you are in and everything to do with understanding how to get the right exposure. What would prevent someone from dialing in more minus compensation once they see that the need less light (if that it what David wanted that is what he could have done. Mode notwithstanding....

BTW,that is a basic photography principle....

Arthur Morris
12-18-2013, 07:32 PM
Hey David, nice tone....
You go do a survey for me , OK, you go interview pro photographers, find those who shoot anything in aperture mode and get back to us... I was attempting to be helpful, sorry, in fact you don't need to ask pro's, you can probably ask 99% of the people who post at BPN and ask them which mode they think will get the best results....., but you go ahead and do what you want.

Hey Dan, As I have seen you make this comment in various threads please know that I work in Av mode about 20% of the time, and in Tv mode about 5% of the time. So I am getting back to you:). Believe it or not there are times when working in an automatic mode is better, faster, and easier than working in Manual mode. It is a myth that real photographers work in Manual mode 100% of the time. Many do, but not me; I believe in understanding exactly which shooting mode is best in a variety of situations and then using it for the reasons stated above: better, faster, and easier.

Arthur Morris
12-18-2013, 07:34 PM
I am a little late to this discussion but I would like to make two comments that hopefully will not offend anyone. First it is obvious from Davids responses that he knew exactly what we wanted to do with the exposure of the scene you might not agree with his vision of the image but it was not a mistake created by bad technique. Second a knowledgeable photographer can use and will know which exposure mode best fits the scene and or is most conductive to creating his vision of the image be it Aperture, Tv, or Manual all three will give you the correct exposure if used properly. One last thought some might find amusing in event photography the inside joke is that the P on the dial stands for profesional or pay day.

Well said Don. Funny thing is that there is even a place for P in nature photography--I always found it best when using fill flash in low, changing light (with EC of course).

Arthur Morris
12-19-2013, 10:31 AM
I am a little late to this discussion but I would like to make two comments that hopefully will not offend anyone. First it is obvious from Davids responses that he knew exactly what we wanted to do with the exposure of the scene you might not agree with his vision of the image but it was not a mistake created by bad technique. Second a knowledgeable photographer can use and will know which exposure mode best fits the scene and or is most conductive to creating his vision of the image be it Aperture, Tv, or Manual all three will give you the correct exposure if used properly. One last thought some might find amusing in event photography the inside joke is that the P on the dial stands for profesional or pay day.

Hey Don, Well said. I agree 100%. When I use fill flash for songbirds in low, changing light P works best with the appropriate EC dialed in :)