Playing with a Macro Extension Lens...
 

John H. wrote:
On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 09:31:44 -0500, HK wrote:

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
. ..
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 03:02:13 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

You have to learn to take pictures which are 99% correct when you click
the
shutter, and forget that there's software, the modern equivalent of the
darkroom. Shut of ALL focus and exposure automation, and never mind the
bad
eyes excuse. Alfred Eisenstadt took nice sharp pictures with a manual
focus
camera until he was much older than you.
I disagree with that approach.

In my opinon, you start with the automagic components and see what the
camera is using as a base line for most of the images you take.

Once you get a feel for how the camera looks at the world, then you
start experimenting with the manual functions bracketing the auto
features base settings.

You have to have a feel for it first.

Admittedly, John is using a hammer to drive a stick pin approach when
he'd probably be better off with a really nice point-and-shoot, but he
has it, so coaching him through the proess is the better way to go.
OK, but one needs to understand what light meters can and cannot do. One
thing they can't do is know what you're photographing. An interesting
exercise is to evenly light 3 different flat objects: One black, one
grey, one white. Fill the viewfinder with each object and take a picture,
letting the camera choose the exposure. Of, if in manual mode, "obey" the
exposure meter. The results should raise questions in the user's mind
immediately.


I don't see how you can take decent indoor portrait shots without a good
flash meter or difficult outdoor shots without a light meter. There are
some combo units that do the job.

It's unlikely that the vast majority of people will buy a flash meter. But,
since flash is usually the dominant light source for indoor pictures, a few
test shots will often solve the problem. With digital, you see the results
right away. With film, you just have to know the characteristics of the film
you're using. There's a guy around here who does a lot of band pictures with
flash, and his shots are gorgeous. He uses some sort of high end Canon
camera. He shuts off all automation and tweaks the manual settings to an
extent that disagrees completely with what the camera says is right.

Outdoors, a separate meter is equally unlikely for most users. A camera with
a spot metering option is helpful. For photographing people, using your own
hand as the meter target is a good trick for setting exposure, assuming it
can be metered in the same light as the subject. But, once that's done, you
have to have a way to tell the auto exposure thing to leave your settings
alone. If the color of your hand doesn't closely match the key subject, then
you have to make adjustments based on your knowledge of grey scales. If the
light's not changing quickly and constantly, one adjustment should be all
you need.

As far as John's problem with manual focus, I wonder if his camera's split
prism isn't up to par. Or, maybe it hasn't got one at all. Even when I was
20, I ran into occasional situations where focusing would've been difficult
without that tool. It's there for a reason, not just for people with bad
eyes. It's fast, too.


http://www.normankoren.com/zonesystem.html
http://www.kodak.com/cluster/global/...f9/index.shtml
http://www.normankoren.com/digital_tonality.html



I don't know what camera Herring is using these days, but if it is a
digital nikon "slr," then it doesn't have a split prism. It takes a lot
of practice to properly focus one of these new digital slrs manually.
Even on pre-digital SLRs, though, once you got beyond a certain focal
length, maybe 105 mm, the damned split prism would black out on one
side, so I simply went to a plain focusing screen.

Life was certainly easier and simpler in the days of TriX, PlusX,
KodaChrome II and Kodacolor!

Harry, I'm using the D200. That's the one you said wasn't worth the cost
when you had your D70, but then you bought the D200 - remember?

Harry, Still doesn't think the D200 is worthwhile, according to Harry,
he prefers his P&S and uses it most of the time. Since he uses his
separate light meter, I am sure he uses a tripod with his P&S.

Playing with a Macro Extension Lens...
 

John H. wrote:
On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 09:31:44 -0500, HK wrote:

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
. ..
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 03:02:13 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

You have to learn to take pictures which are 99% correct when you click
the
shutter, and forget that there's software, the modern equivalent of the
darkroom. Shut of ALL focus and exposure automation, and never mind the
bad
eyes excuse. Alfred Eisenstadt took nice sharp pictures with a manual
focus
camera until he was much older than you.
I disagree with that approach.

In my opinon, you start with the automagic components and see what the
camera is using as a base line for most of the images you take.

Once you get a feel for how the camera looks at the world, then you
start experimenting with the manual functions bracketing the auto
features base settings.

You have to have a feel for it first.

Admittedly, John is using a hammer to drive a stick pin approach when
he'd probably be better off with a really nice point-and-shoot, but he
has it, so coaching him through the proess is the better way to go.
OK, but one needs to understand what light meters can and cannot do. One
thing they can't do is know what you're photographing. An interesting
exercise is to evenly light 3 different flat objects: One black, one
grey, one white. Fill the viewfinder with each object and take a picture,
letting the camera choose the exposure. Of, if in manual mode, "obey" the
exposure meter. The results should raise questions in the user's mind
immediately.


I don't see how you can take decent indoor portrait shots without a good
flash meter or difficult outdoor shots without a light meter. There are
some combo units that do the job.

It's unlikely that the vast majority of people will buy a flash meter. But,
since flash is usually the dominant light source for indoor pictures, a few
test shots will often solve the problem. With digital, you see the results
right away. With film, you just have to know the characteristics of the film
you're using. There's a guy around here who does a lot of band pictures with
flash, and his shots are gorgeous. He uses some sort of high end Canon
camera. He shuts off all automation and tweaks the manual settings to an
extent that disagrees completely with what the camera says is right.

Outdoors, a separate meter is equally unlikely for most users. A camera with
a spot metering option is helpful. For photographing people, using your own
hand as the meter target is a good trick for setting exposure, assuming it
can be metered in the same light as the subject. But, once that's done, you
have to have a way to tell the auto exposure thing to leave your settings
alone. If the color of your hand doesn't closely match the key subject, then
you have to make adjustments based on your knowledge of grey scales. If the
light's not changing quickly and constantly, one adjustment should be all
you need.

As far as John's problem with manual focus, I wonder if his camera's split
prism isn't up to par. Or, maybe it hasn't got one at all. Even when I was
20, I ran into occasional situations where focusing would've been difficult
without that tool. It's there for a reason, not just for people with bad
eyes. It's fast, too.


http://www.normankoren.com/zonesystem.html
http://www.kodak.com/cluster/global/...f9/index.shtml
http://www.normankoren.com/digital_tonality.html



I don't know what camera Herring is using these days, but if it is a
digital nikon "slr," then it doesn't have a split prism. It takes a lot
of practice to properly focus one of these new digital slrs manually.
Even on pre-digital SLRs, though, once you got beyond a certain focal
length, maybe 105 mm, the damned split prism would black out on one
side, so I simply went to a plain focusing screen.

Life was certainly easier and simpler in the days of TriX, PlusX,
KodaChrome II and Kodacolor!

Harry, I'm using the D200. That's the one you said wasn't worth the cost
when you had your D70, but then you bought the D200 - remember?


It's not my job to keep track of your stuff, John, or what you are using
at any given moment.

Playing with a Macro Extension Lens...
 

John H. wrote:
On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 09:33:16 -0500, HK wrote:

John H. wrote:
On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 08:47:31 -0500, HK wrote:

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 03:02:13 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

You have to learn to take pictures which are 99% correct when you click
the
shutter, and forget that there's software, the modern equivalent of the
darkroom. Shut of ALL focus and exposure automation, and never mind the
bad
eyes excuse. Alfred Eisenstadt took nice sharp pictures with a manual
focus
camera until he was much older than you.
I disagree with that approach.

In my opinon, you start with the automagic components and see what the
camera is using as a base line for most of the images you take.

Once you get a feel for how the camera looks at the world, then you
start experimenting with the manual functions bracketing the auto
features base settings.

You have to have a feel for it first.

Admittedly, John is using a hammer to drive a stick pin approach when
he'd probably be better off with a really nice point-and-shoot, but he
has it, so coaching him through the proess is the better way to go.
OK, but one needs to understand what light meters can and cannot do. One
thing they can't do is know what you're photographing. An interesting
exercise is to evenly light 3 different flat objects: One black, one grey,
one white. Fill the viewfinder with each object and take a picture, letting
the camera choose the exposure. Of, if in manual mode, "obey" the exposure
meter. The results should raise questions in the user's mind immediately.




I don't see how you can take decent indoor portrait shots without a good
flash meter or difficult outdoor shots without a light meter. There are
some combo units that do the job.
Indoor: http://tinyurl.com/38736z

Outdoor: http://tinyurl.com/yu575t

Easy.

Very nice snapshots, John, but not what I was discussing.

I'm sure you would have used floodlights, light meters, reflective
umbrellas, and a nice secular backdrop, and got it all in about 12 seconds.


As I stated, they're both very nice snapshots. I appreciate the
difficulty in getting a bunch of rugrats to sit still for anything.

If the picture were critical, I would have used a fixed focal length
wide angle lens on the port shot, and used as high an f-stop as possible
to keep more of the scene in focus. It falls off there in the background
rather sharply. But as a snapshot, it is a very nice photo.

Mellow out.

Playing with a Macro Extension Lens...
 

On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 09:08:00 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
[email protected] wrote:

HK wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 03:02:13 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

You have to learn to take pictures which are 99% correct when you
click the
shutter, and forget that there's software, the modern equivalent of the
darkroom. Shut of ALL focus and exposure automation, and never mind
the bad
eyes excuse. Alfred Eisenstadt took nice sharp pictures with a
manual focus
camera until he was much older than you.
I disagree with that approach.

In my opinon, you start with the automagic components and see what the
camera is using as a base line for most of the images you take.

Once you get a feel for how the camera looks at the world, then you
start experimenting with the manual functions bracketing the auto
features base settings.

You have to have a feel for it first.

Admittedly, John is using a hammer to drive a stick pin approach when
he'd probably be better off with a really nice point-and-shoot, but he
has it, so coaching him through the proess is the better way to go.


OK, but one needs to understand what light meters can and cannot do.
One thing they can't do is know what you're photographing. An
interesting exercise is to evenly light 3 different flat objects: One
black, one grey, one white. Fill the viewfinder with each object and
take a picture, letting the camera choose the exposure. Of, if in
manual mode, "obey" the exposure meter. The results should raise
questions in the user's mind immediately.





I don't see how you can take decent indoor portrait shots without a good
flash meter or difficult outdoor shots without a light meter. There are
some combo units that do the job.

Harry,
You seem to know a lot about photography, but all I have seen you post
are really crappy snapshots. I know I take some really crappy photos,
but I am just learning. Why don't you share some of your better photos
where you have used a good flash meter or light meter. Since you have
said that you really use your point and shot for almost all of your
current photos, does your point and shoot allow you to manually adjust
your settings to take advantage of the additional metering info? I am
looking for a point and shoot, just to carry in my pocket, but have
never thought about carrying a flash and light meter along with my P&S.
Do you find the P&S easy to manually adjust?

I thought the picture of the HP printer with the WalMart coupon was a fine
example of the photography Harry is discussing.
--
John H

Playing with a Macro Extension Lens...
 

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 09:33:16 -0500, HK wrote:

John H. wrote:
On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 08:47:31 -0500, HK wrote:

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 03:02:13 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

You have to learn to take pictures which are 99% correct when you
click
the
shutter, and forget that there's software, the modern equivalent of
the
darkroom. Shut of ALL focus and exposure automation, and never mind
the
bad
eyes excuse. Alfred Eisenstadt took nice sharp pictures with a
manual
focus
camera until he was much older than you.
I disagree with that approach.

In my opinon, you start with the automagic components and see what
the
camera is using as a base line for most of the images you take.

Once you get a feel for how the camera looks at the world, then you
start experimenting with the manual functions bracketing the auto
features base settings.

You have to have a feel for it first.

Admittedly, John is using a hammer to drive a stick pin approach when
he'd probably be better off with a really nice point-and-shoot, but
he
has it, so coaching him through the proess is the better way to go.

OK, but one needs to understand what light meters can and cannot do.
One
thing they can't do is know what you're photographing. An interesting
exercise is to evenly light 3 different flat objects: One black, one
grey,
one white. Fill the viewfinder with each object and take a picture,
letting
the camera choose the exposure. Of, if in manual mode, "obey" the
exposure
meter. The results should raise questions in the user's mind
immediately.





I don't see how you can take decent indoor portrait shots without a
good
flash meter or difficult outdoor shots without a light meter. There are
some combo units that do the job.

Indoor: http://tinyurl.com/38736z

Outdoor: http://tinyurl.com/yu575t

Easy.


Very nice snapshots, John, but not what I was discussing.

I'm sure you would have used floodlights, light meters, reflective
umbrellas, and a nice secular backdrop, and got it all in about 12
seconds.
--
John H

John, he said "difficult outdoor shots". Yours was a nice picture, but there
nothing about it that would've challenged the abilities of the camera.
That's what he meant.

Playing with a Macro Extension Lens...
 

John H. wrote:
On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 09:08:00 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
[email protected] wrote:

HK wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 03:02:13 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

You have to learn to take pictures which are 99% correct when you
click the
shutter, and forget that there's software, the modern equivalent of the
darkroom. Shut of ALL focus and exposure automation, and never mind
the bad
eyes excuse. Alfred Eisenstadt took nice sharp pictures with a
manual focus
camera until he was much older than you.
I disagree with that approach.

In my opinon, you start with the automagic components and see what the
camera is using as a base line for most of the images you take.

Once you get a feel for how the camera looks at the world, then you
start experimenting with the manual functions bracketing the auto
features base settings.

You have to have a feel for it first.

Admittedly, John is using a hammer to drive a stick pin approach when
he'd probably be better off with a really nice point-and-shoot, but he
has it, so coaching him through the proess is the better way to go.

OK, but one needs to understand what light meters can and cannot do.
One thing they can't do is know what you're photographing. An
interesting exercise is to evenly light 3 different flat objects: One
black, one grey, one white. Fill the viewfinder with each object and
take a picture, letting the camera choose the exposure. Of, if in
manual mode, "obey" the exposure meter. The results should raise
questions in the user's mind immediately.




I don't see how you can take decent indoor portrait shots without a good
flash meter or difficult outdoor shots without a light meter. There are
some combo units that do the job.
Harry,
You seem to know a lot about photography, but all I have seen you post
are really crappy snapshots. I know I take some really crappy photos,
but I am just learning. Why don't you share some of your better photos
where you have used a good flash meter or light meter. Since you have
said that you really use your point and shot for almost all of your
current photos, does your point and shoot allow you to manually adjust
your settings to take advantage of the additional metering info? I am
looking for a point and shoot, just to carry in my pocket, but have
never thought about carrying a flash and light meter along with my P&S.
Do you find the P&S easy to manually adjust?

I thought the picture of the HP printer with the WalMart coupon was a fine
example of the photography Harry is discussing.

It was nice, but not as nice as the one of his boat going to sleep.

Playing with a Macro Extension Lens...
 

On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 09:43:16 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
[email protected] wrote:

Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
John H. wrote:

Oh. It was a snapshot. Then why worry about it?

I expect my snapshots to have a bit of quality. You know, like the owls.

JohnH,

I am not as experienced a photographer as Harry, and don't use an
additional flash meter and light meter, but am working on more
effectively using the on camera metering options. You have the option of
using a matrix, center weighted or spot metering, at the flick of a switch.

I took a photo class run by a professional photographer
((http://www.nikoniansacademy.com/winstonHall.html) who told me you can
actually use the in camera light meter the same way one would use a
separate light meter, by using the AE-L (auto-exposure lock button)
located on the back of the camera. You take the light reading of your
subject, lock the exposure, than go back and compose the shot.

Again, I am a real rookie who has never used a separate light meter, and
am only basing my comments on a professional photographer recommendation
who owned and used a Nikon D200 in his business, so take my comments for
what they are worth.

I meant to include this link for a simple explanation of the zone system.

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tut...a-metering.htm

I really need to read this often, to refresh my memory.

]Very informative, thanks.
--
John H

Playing with a Macro Extension Lens...
 

On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 09:46:42 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
[email protected] wrote:

HK wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
. ..
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 03:02:13 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

You have to learn to take pictures which are 99% correct when you
click the
shutter, and forget that there's software, the modern equivalent
of the
darkroom. Shut of ALL focus and exposure automation, and never
mind the bad
eyes excuse. Alfred Eisenstadt took nice sharp pictures with a
manual focus
camera until he was much older than you.
I disagree with that approach.

In my opinon, you start with the automagic components and see what the
camera is using as a base line for most of the images you take.

Once you get a feel for how the camera looks at the world, then you
start experimenting with the manual functions bracketing the auto
features base settings.

You have to have a feel for it first.

Admittedly, John is using a hammer to drive a stick pin approach when
he'd probably be better off with a really nice point-and-shoot, but he
has it, so coaching him through the proess is the better way to go.

OK, but one needs to understand what light meters can and cannot do.
One thing they can't do is know what you're photographing. An
interesting exercise is to evenly light 3 different flat objects:
One black, one grey, one white. Fill the viewfinder with each object
and take a picture, letting the camera choose the exposure. Of, if
in manual mode, "obey" the exposure meter. The results should raise
questions in the user's mind immediately.



I don't see how you can take decent indoor portrait shots without a
good flash meter or difficult outdoor shots without a light meter.
There are some combo units that do the job.


It's unlikely that the vast majority of people will buy a flash meter.
But, since flash is usually the dominant light source for indoor
pictures, a few test shots will often solve the problem. With digital,
you see the results right away. With film, you just have to know the
characteristics of the film you're using. There's a guy around here
who does a lot of band pictures with flash, and his shots are
gorgeous. He uses some sort of high end Canon camera. He shuts off all
automation and tweaks the manual settings to an extent that disagrees
completely with what the camera says is right.

Outdoors, a separate meter is equally unlikely for most users. A
camera with a spot metering option is helpful. For photographing
people, using your own hand as the meter target is a good trick for
setting exposure, assuming it can be metered in the same light as the
subject. But, once that's done, you have to have a way to tell the
auto exposure thing to leave your settings alone. If the color of your
hand doesn't closely match the key subject, then you have to make
adjustments based on your knowledge of grey scales. If the light's not
changing quickly and constantly, one adjustment should be all you need.

As far as John's problem with manual focus, I wonder if his camera's
split prism isn't up to par. Or, maybe it hasn't got one at all. Even
when I was 20, I ran into occasional situations where focusing
would've been difficult without that tool. It's there for a reason,
not just for people with bad eyes. It's fast, too.


http://www.normankoren.com/zonesystem.html
http://www.kodak.com/cluster/global/...f9/index.shtml

http://www.normankoren.com/digital_tonality.html



I don't know what camera Herring is using these days, but if it is a
digital nikon "slr," then it doesn't have a split prism. It takes a lot
of practice to properly focus one of these new digital slrs manually.
Even on pre-digital SLRs, though, once you got beyond a certain focal
length, maybe 105 mm, the damned split prism would black out on one
side, so I simply went to a plain focusing screen.


Actually it is not as hard to manually focus as one would think with the
Nikon D200. If you manually focus on the subject, a light on the far
left in the camera viewfinder will come on when you are focus, then you
can compose your shot.

By golly, you're right!
--
John H

Playing with a Macro Extension Lens...
 

On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 11:45:15 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 09:43:16 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
[email protected] wrote:

Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
John H. wrote:

Oh. It was a snapshot. Then why worry about it?

I expect my snapshots to have a bit of quality. You know, like the owls.

JohnH,

I am not as experienced a photographer as Harry, and don't use an
additional flash meter and light meter, but am working on more
effectively using the on camera metering options. You have the option of
using a matrix, center weighted or spot metering, at the flick of a switch.

I took a photo class run by a professional photographer
((http://www.nikoniansacademy.com/winstonHall.html) who told me you can
actually use the in camera light meter the same way one would use a
separate light meter, by using the AE-L (auto-exposure lock button)
located on the back of the camera. You take the light reading of your
subject, lock the exposure, than go back and compose the shot.

Again, I am a real rookie who has never used a separate light meter, and
am only basing my comments on a professional photographer recommendation
who owned and used a Nikon D200 in his business, so take my comments for
what they are worth.

I meant to include this link for a simple explanation of the zone system.

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tut...a-metering.htm

I really need to read this often, to refresh my memory.

]Very informative, thanks.

Just keep in mind that the zone system is only a guide based on gray
scale B&W and does not necessarily translate to color given a number
of reasons.

Having said that, if you pay attention to it closely and keep the
concept in the back of your mind when capturing images, it will only
improve your composing and editing skills.

Playing with a Macro Extension Lens...
 

On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 10:08:25 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 09:24:44 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
[email protected] wrote:

John H. wrote:
This picture was taken from about six feet away. In looking
at the EXIF data, I noticed that the 'sharpness' was set at 'soft'. I've
got to check into that. Maybe that's part of my problem.

All I have to say is "Duuuuhhhhhh". ;)

I appreciate your suggestions.

Give me a break! I spent 30 years with a Canon FTQL. I didn't have to be a
damn IT professional to take a picture.

That image isn't over sharpened - it's strictly a result of the flash
light wandering all over the place.

One thing to keep in mind, is that professional photographers,
including outdoors/nature/action types, very rarely use an undiffused
flash.

This is a flash difusser.

http://tinyurl.com/2yhj8u

The other piece of gear that will help you "learn" and give almost
instant results is the use of neutral density filters.

http://tinyurl.com/ytrzw2