id really like to hear some comments abt my photos. my d100 is always overexposed by 0.7 with or without flash. i use mainly autowb and iso 800. so far all my clients are happy with their pics but is there a prob with my settings? i shoot mainly in jpeg fine and print up to 16 x 20 and they're still alright, even at iso 800. Thanks
#1. "RE: are my shots overexposed" | In response to Reply # 0kmiecmonster Registered since 30th Apr 2002Fri 13-Jun-03 02:11 PM
well with out knowing specifically which ones I looked over a bunch of them and I didn't find them to be over exposed. in my experience when the weather is very sunny i set the exposure to +.3 when the weather os over cast or I am indoors I use +.7.
your hand coloring is wondeful by the way. what is your technique.
Give me my D2Hs and 50mm 1.4, then step out of my way.
#2. "RE: are my shots overexposed" | In response to Reply # 1Mike777 Registered since 16th Sep 2002Fri 13-Jun-03 02:49 PM
I presume you use matrix metering and not centre weighted. I find CW metering on my D100 to be pretty inaccurate.
Anyway, fantastic images and really I couldn't see any particuarly overexposed images.
Maybe you can post a sample with the shooting data and we can compare.
My camera on matrix tends to u/e by 2/3 stop. On spot it seems to underexpose by even more on the subject point and the rest of the image goes haywire.
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
#3. "Overexposure? Wow, this is a first for the D100" | In response to Reply # 0
We usually hear a multitude of horror stories about the D100 consistently underexposing shots by up to a full stop. So hearing a tidbit about a D100 overexposing by +0.7 is interesting to say the least.
I have a scenario with my D100 that sometimes bothers me, but I tend to look for it now everytime I turn on the camera. There were times when I took a photo and wondered why it was either underexposed or overexposed, so I eventually checked my exposure compensation button and wallaaaaa - there it showed an overexposure of up to +1.0, or an underexposure setting of up to -1.0. How these settings got there, I don't know - I certainly didn't set the exposure compensation settings. And I noticed that this scenario often occured when I was changing back and forth between a normal tone setting to a custom tone curve. I don't know if this has happened to others, but it certainly caused me to begin checking my exposure compensation settings prior to shooting to ensure that they were set on "0".
The reason I mentioned this bit of info is that I didn't realize until after I shot a whole series of photos during one particular photo session. Seeing the resultant photos in Nikon View and then subsequently in PS-7 drove me up a wall until I realized what was happening. Then I became the wiser.
Not that this solves your dilemma, but it is an interesting tidbit that you also might want to check for. As for your photos, they did not look overexposed to me, but then every monitor is different and mine tends to darken subjects.
Fuquay-Varina, North Carolina USA
#4. "RE: Overexposure? Wow, this is a first for the D100" | In response to Reply # 3fundy Registered since 13th Nov 2002Fri 13-Jun-03 08:18 PM
I think it is really difficult to see if the camera isn't exposing well on the computer screen. I have found shots that look great on the screen have washed out colors when printed.
The only way for you to know, is go take some photos of something with lush colors in good light at different exposures and print them out.
My camera seems to expose right on, some others may be different. Before printing I do usually bump up saturation a little using Digital Velvia though, usually plus 1.
Oregonian Nikonian presently found on Shikoku, Japan
#5. "RE: Overexposure? Wow, this is a first for the D100" | In response to Reply # 4guyb Registered since 11th Apr 2002Fri 13-Jun-03 11:17 PM
Just a tip. If I periodically check my histogram I can tell if things are being under and overexposed.
Another reason I mention this is that you can have an image that is within the dynamic range of the camera and have it look, on screen, underexposed or overexposed. You can adjust it in software and still not be clipping the ends of the histogram. I think this is what is happening with many people commenting on under and over exposure. Obviously, I don't know if you have ever had the problem, but I thought I'd mention it since others have had it.
BTW very, very nice site design and pics.
#6. "histogram" | In response to Reply # 5Saxofonix Registered since 21st Jun 2002Sat 14-Jun-03 01:12 AM
>Just a tip. If I periodically check my histogram I can tell
>if things are being under and overexposed.
I agree whole-heartedly with this.
As as wedding photographer, one of your concerns is to not lose detail in the white dress. For this, the histogram and blinking highlights setting are invaluable tools.
So if you think your images are over-exposed, just make sure you aren't clipping your highlights.
#7. "RE: histogram" | In response to Reply # 6abcphoto Registered since 29th Sep 2002Sat 14-Jun-03 06:57 AM
thanks for all the comments and tips.
correction; my d100 doesnt overexpose by 0.7 ev, i set it there coz it always underexposes. all my shots i need to improve in photoshop which automatically needs the auto contrast command; if i dont do that, there seems to be a cloud over my pictures. i've read so many times that most of you are on cloudy -3. i havent tried that yet.
well, i have another wedding tomorrow and i'll and implement ur tips and i'll get back to you guys.
btw, i just select, deselect, and desaturate the ones that have the black and wjite and colored combinations.