Donald - Where have you been all my life

[bfkimball]

Can you guys walk us newbies through your manual shooting workflow? I have many (way too many) questions. I hope I don't sound skeptical. I'm genuinely intrigued. :-)

-Are your eyes the meter, or do you still rely on your camera's meter?
-If the former, how do you judge your scene? Just based on past experience?
-If the latter, what's different about choosing an exposure manually that your camera would have picked anyway? And do you use evaluative, center, or spot metering?

-Is manual shooting a lot of trial and error, i.e. looking at display & histogram and reshooting again and again?
-Is ETTR involved when applicable, or are you always trying to nail the tones in-camera?

-manual ISO or auto? I'm guessing manual.

-Do you rely on auto WB or do you preset your WB based on lighting conditions?


Obviously some kinds of shooting can't easily be done manually. Action sports and birds in flight come to mind. On the other end, manually shooting landscapes and/or still life seems like a no-brainer. Street photography and just wandering around and shooting whatever catches your eye sounds questionable. I'd worry about missing a moment. What's been your experience?

Thanks. :-)

[Colin Southern]

Hi Brian,

Are your eyes the meter, or do you still rely on your camera's meter?

It would be a brave man who "meters by eye" (although it's not impossible).

If the latter, what's different about choosing an exposure manually that your camera would have picked anyway? And do you use evaluative, center, or spot metering?

In manual metering mode the lightmeter goes from a full authority mode to an advisory mode. In reality the camera ALWAYS meters by assuming that what it's pointing at is a medium gray, but in reality the result you get depends on metering mode selected. Wider-scope modes like evaluative / matrix are more likely to average out to a medium gray anyway (unless it's the proverbial polar bear in a snow storm or a black cat on a black rug) ... whereas narrower scope modes like spot metering are going to assume you're pointing at a medium gray so you have to apply a correction depending on what you're pointing at (the camera will under-expose a white scene by around 2 stops, and over-expose a black reflective object by around 2 stops -- in each case "turning" it medium gray). So in reality spot metering is the most powerful because it tells you exactly where anything you point to is going to expose, for a given set of manual settings. eg, if you spot meter a bride in a white dress and the meter shows +2EV and then you spot meter the groom in a black suit and the meter shows -2EV then you can take the shot knowing your exposure is going to be pretty good. If however you spot meter the groom - and he's at +2EV then he's going to be exposed as a highlight, and the bride's dress will be nuked beyond recovery.

-Is manual shooting a lot of trial and error, i.e. looking at display & histogram and reshooting again and again?

Yes and no - if you meter carefully then you have total knowledge before you press the button as to how it's going to turn out, but in reality a digital photo is cheap and often it's easy to just take the shot - look at the histogram to guage any degree of under-exposure, and use flashing highlight alerts to guage any degree of over-exposure.

-Is ETTR involved when applicable, or are you always trying to nail the tones in-camera?

ETTR is misleading - there are times when it is essential (eg high dynamic range scenes) (eg shooting into the light source whilst still desiring to preserve foreground shadow detail) and there are times when it'll bite you in the bum (eg shooting a low dynamic range scene) (the problem with the latter is that it forces tones to be recorded way higher than they are, and although this captures the maximum amount of information - unfortunately - it often pushes one or more channels into a somewhat non-linear portion of the response curve which means you get weird colour shifts that are practically impossible to correct in post-processing because the cast changes depending on the tone. Nightmare stuff.

-manual ISO or auto? I'm guessing manual.

Usually manual.

-Do you rely on auto WB or do you preset your WB based on lighting conditions?

Most will be shooting RAW which doesn't have a white balance at the time of capture -- this is decided later in post processing. The easiest way to get WB corrct is to include a grey card in the scene initially and then use that as a spectrally neutral reference to correct against in PP.

Obviously some kinds of shooting can't easily be done manually. Action sports and birds in flight come to mind. On the other end, manually shooting landscapes and/or still life seems like a no-brainer.

No, pretty mugh the opposite actually. When shooting outside in sunlight conditions, the intensity of the sun isn't changing a lot - so the exposure doesn't need to change a lot either. So if you shoot manually then you can be assured that your exposures will be consistent, which makes getting consistent results a LOT easier. With landscape, the camera usually does a pretty good job all by itself in evaluative/matrix mode - and if the camera gets it wrong, a small BUT CONSISTENT exposure compensation is usually all that's required. So it's actually easier a lot of the time to just use Aperture priority and let the camera to the thinking.

Street photography and just wandering around and shooting whatever catches your eye sounds questionable. I'd worry about missing a moment. What's been your experience?

You CAN do it, but it's really just making like harder for yourself. The camera is going to work out the correct exposure (or close to it) in variable light situation a lot quicker than we are - so why not just use the technology we've paid for

Hope this helps

[Letrow]

Another technique I like to use, that helps to maintain the original author and post links in the quote is to open a message reply in a new tab (or window if that's your weapon of choice), then back in the original thread tab click the 'reply with quote' link which provides the quote with the author and post ID # info. Copy, paste, repeat.

You can also build that info manually, but might as well make the computers do the work until they rise up and become our new overlords.




Let me know when/where you're going diving, and I'll meet you there....

- Bill

Every forum is different it seems. At my guitar forum we simplified this process by having a Multi button next to Reply and Reply With Quote. You click Multi in several posts, then Reply at bottom of page and voila. I guess our software doesn't do that yet.

[Colin Southern]

Every forum is different it seems.

At my guitar forum we simplified this process by having a Multi button next to Reply and Reply With Quote.

You click Multi in several posts, then Reply at bottom of page and voila.

I guess our software doesn't do that yet.

We have a quote button that puts quote tags around the selected text which I guess is similar, but I ususally just type them

[arith]

Can you guys walk us newbies through your manual shooting workflow? I have many (way too many) questions. I hope I don't sound skeptical. I'm genuinely intrigued. :-)

-Are your eyes the meter, or do you still rely on your camera's meter?
-If the former, how do you judge your scene? Just based on past experience?
-If the latter, what's different about choosing an exposure manually that your camera would have picked anyway? And do you use evaluative, center, or spot metering?

-Is manual shooting a lot of trial and error, i.e. looking at display & histogram and reshooting again and again?
-Is ETTR involved when applicable, or are you always trying to nail the tones in-camera?

-manual ISO or auto? I'm guessing manual.

-Do you rely on auto WB or do you preset your WB based on lighting conditions?


Obviously some kinds of shooting can't easily be done manually. Action sports and birds in flight come to mind. On the other end, manually shooting landscapes and/or still life seems like a no-brainer. Street photography and just wandering around and shooting whatever catches your eye sounds questionable. I'd worry about missing a moment. What's been your experience?

Thanks. :-)

I shoot landscape and architecture so it isn't going anywhere fast.
a) I set iso at 100 unless I know I'm going to have trouble with movement/light, then it goes to 400 or 800 even if it is very dark.
i) compose the shot taking note of the brightest and darkest parts of the frame.
ii) Note the focal length and choose aperture according to hyperfocal length and diffraction/lens limits.(usually f6.4 but I guess the light)
iii) On spot I meter on the brightest part by putting the needle in the viewfinder almost all the way to the right, then pointing at the dark spot note if the needle is blinking on and off; if it is worry.
iv)Take a shot and look at colour histograms; I count each vertical partition as 2ev and expose to the right. The adjust and take the shot. Repeat as necessary.
v) I only shoot RAW and use a grey card either before or after the shot, I'm always breaking this routine because either I have to wait for something to go or change, but mostly I like to do this last.

Taking manual shots of birds taking off isn't the cleverest thing I can think of, but it is all a matter of knowing your subject; knowing where they will likely be and setting up in advance so that only small changes are needed; well that's the way I used to do it with fast moving objects.

[Donald]

Can you guys walk us newbies through your manual shooting workflow?

Just as that guy Southern said above.

-Are your eyes the meter,

No, but it's the starting point of a process.

If you haven't come across Ansel Adams' 'Zone System', it's worth grasping a basic understanding of what it's about. Now, as my personal guru (he doesn't know that he is), Michael Freeman, says in 'The Complete Guide to Black & White Digital Photography' (Ilex, 2009)

"Ansel Adams et al's Zone System never seems to go away, despite the fact that it was invented for a highly specific kind of photography that very few people ever practiced - namely black and white sheet film used for subjects over which the photographer could muse and ponder without being in a rush . ...

"The fundamental question for using it in digital photography is not how but why. ...

"That said, it is ... a useful way of thinking about and assessing scenes and images" (p166)

So looking is the start of your process of evaluating the scene that you intend to photograph, at which point you then turn to the meter for information. Looking to that extent also, I suggest, contributes significantly to your compositional skills. So you get a bonus for all that effort.

But, please remember, I can only talk from the perspective of one who does indeed approach photography as an exercise in musing and pondering. I spend ages looking before I ever press the shutter. That's where I get my greatest satisfaction. So, it works for me. I'm not advocating that others should follow my way of thinking and my practice.

[MiniChris]

Anyone wanting a relatively simple explanation of the Zone system can PM me with an emaill address and I will gladly send you what I use with my students...even though it is considered the simplified version, it still takes re-readin several times over to understand completely. AND, it is written for film users, specifically 4x5 for my students. It is not that it is for film that you should pay close attention to, it is the concept by which you can set the image in a particular zone and then process to get back details you might lose in exposure.

With digital, there is a reversal of sorts in how you meter, and of course, you use PP techniques to recover what is lost in exposing....but the results are stunning (as per the digital side, I am just learning, but plan to know it from top to bottom by school's end).

If you plan to seriously persue digital Zone shooting, you will want to invest in a good spotmeter.

[GlenM]

I will gladly send you what I use with my students

Yes please! Even though it will probably be over the top of my head, I'm always interested in learning (or at least trying to).

Besides, now I also have a film camera to deal with (see my last post in 'Nature') , I'll have something to relate to

I'll send you my email shortly.

Thanks!

[bfkimball]

Colin, Steve, Donald, Chris: thank you so much for your helpful replies. I don't feel experienced enough to try manual shooting right now, but I've bookmarked this thread and hope to return to when I'm ready to experiment. Baby steps. :-)

Regarding the zone system, I've read Adam's 3 book series but have yet to apply any of it (just bought my first DSLR two weeks ago), so it's just book smarts at this point. And of course the Negative is about film, not digital. Chris, I will PM you to take you up on your offer.

Thanks!

[purplehaze]

Now, as my personal guru (he doesn't know that he is), Michael Freeman, says in 'The Complete Guide to Black & White Digital Photography' (Ilex, 2009)

Having just started shooting manual in the last few weeks, I am finding Freeman's "Perfect Exposure" enormously helpful. He identifies twelve basic types of exposure situations and breaks down his exposure decision workflow according to whether the scene to be photographed fits the dynamic range of the camera, or is on the low or the high side. I can't recommend it enough. It is helping me to learn how to see and assess tone. I have a long way to go, obviously, but it is a great guide.

[Rasbury]

I recently bought Mastering Exposure and the Zone System by Lee Varis and found it to be a very informative book.He also has tutorials on his web page(Lee Varis.com)that might come in handy to help explain the zone system to those who are unfamiliar with it.(like myself,but i love andsel adams work)as far as this site goes i found it while looking for tutorials and am glad i stopped here.
Ron

[Laidbackcyclist]

I think I'm slow in the uptake too. For years I've been using aperture or shutter priority to get the effects i want. However it was only last weekend that I realised that with auto ISO I can set both shutter speed and aperture for the creative effect I want and still let the camera take care of the exposure. The only thing to worry about is not to set the auto ISO maximum too high or there will be unacceptable grain. How long have I been missing this :-(

[Hero]

I think I'm slow in the uptake too. For years I've been using aperture or shutter priority to get the effects i want. However it was only last weekend that I realised that with auto ISO I can set both shutter speed and aperture for the creative effect I want and still let the camera take care of the exposure.

That one has bitten me in the backside a few times. Usually when working near the border between two values. Adding TTL-flash makes it even worse. In that setting the meter on my old D40 still tried to do his work. But because iso and flash are very limited tools for a meter to work with, it would often g00f-up big time leaving me with heavily under- or over exposed images.
So set it to manual, it ain't that hard a job to wiggle it when you can't get what you want with shutterspeed and/or aperture alone.