i finally was able to get a shot of the hawk that flies near my house. but when i took the pics they came out dark? it was cloudy out but still had plenty of light. can some one tell me some tips on how to do this better?
here are the pics. the dark ones are right out of the camera. and the lighter ones are from using picture project. there all shot at
F7.1
1/3200
ISO 400
200MM
Center weight and the whitebalance was set on cloudy

---

D40 18-55MM 55-200MM VR Tamron 70-300MM
Canon S3 IS
Canon A570 IS
Kodak Z710

When you look at your histogram is it all bunched over to the left? You need to overexpose by about 2 stops ie treat the sky as you would snow. :D

I'm glad the person below me agrees with me :D

 

---

www.fotodayz.co.uk

Wilson

As you're shooting against the sky your camera will be trying to expose for it (the bright sky) and will therefore render an object infront of it (a darker object) as partly silhouetted.

You could try spot metering but you might not be able to meter a flying bird quickly enough. Try setting exposure compensation by +1 stop, this might 'blow' the sky a little but should better expose the bird.

Hope this helps.

Adam

---

My DCM Gallery
My Website

can i look at the histogram. before i shoot. and if so how?

---

D40 18-55MM 55-200MM VR Tamron 70-300MM
Canon S3 IS
Canon A570 IS
Kodak Z710

wilson44512:

can i look at the histogram. before i shoot. and if so how?

No, it only appears on your LCD screen when you have taken the photo. This allows you to check the image quickly, and using the info to dial in a plus or minus adjustment and take another photo. It's no good for flying birds. After doing this a few times with different skys, you should be able to judge when you need to dial in some compensation, before taking the shot.

---

SK
The Best Photographer in the world 4th November - 5th November 2006 & 17th-18 November 2007
Oldboy’s Gallery

i was able to get a better shot of him.

---

D40 18-55MM 55-200MM VR Tamron 70-300MM
Canon S3 IS
Canon A570 IS
Kodak Z710

    Next question is why using ISO 400 when your speed is at 1/3200? Always use the lowest ISO unless the speed drops dramatically. You are very safe with 1/100. 1/60 is still good in most cases.
Shooting against a sky as a background will give you backlit pictures. Yes, you can correct and overexpose by one or two stop but then your sky is going too bright. Though your sky was cloudy and this was less noticable, this is a backlit picture.

I often use ISO 400 - yes its good to keep it low - but the noise levels on most DSLR's at 400 are so low as to not worry about with these types of shot.

I'd rather have a overexposed sky and a correctly exposed main subject than not.

---

Mark

Digital Photo Group
My Website

Ne nuntium necare

Ok to keep ISO low but when you're photographing things like flying birds the light constantly changes. Better a higher ISO sharp picture than a low ISO blurry shot - you can always use noise reduction software later. I tend to use 400ISO as default for wandering around waiting to see something.

---

a few mediocre pics

    Yes if your shutter speed was at 1/100, I would have said that the next shot could be blurry if the light was different. But your shutter speed was at 1/3200. It is like driving on the motorway at 10mph pretending that this is safe. Everything is about balance. Why risking to have noise when you have that much margin. You start at ISO 100 and if shutter speed is way to low and you  don't have a safety margin, then you go up to ISO 200, 400,...
So speeding on a motorway is dangerous but driving too slow also is.
Do you know one of the first reason pros get a shot refused is noise?
So I preferer to miss several shots because they are blurry and get a few great shots once in a while.
If on a week, I shoot around 3,000 shots and bring back 20-40 great shots, I'm happy.
I am not saying don't use ISO400, I say don't use it when not necessary. ISO400 with shutter speed 1/3200 don't make sense... to me. But by reading your comments I am wondering if I am alone think this.

Why use 1/3200 sec on a still subject?. That alone would surely give an underexposed shot. I would have thought a much slower speed would be appropriate, and iso 200.

---

Be nice to each other


My DCM Gallery

bsamoy:

   I am not saying don't use ISO400, I say don't use it when not necessary. ISO400 with shutter speed 1/3200 don't make sense... to me. But by reading your comments I am wondering if I am alone think this.

You are not alone, I agree with you. 

BUT, I also understand that sometimes (and we must all be guilty of this on occassion), when the camera is set on a previous setting, or even in auto, and you have a split second to take the shot I'd rather get something than nothing.  Just point and shoot, then if you have time have a look at the meter, change the values and have a go again. 

I remember not so long ago (3 years as it happens) sat in a thrid floor hotel room choking on smog.  The sun had set and the streets came alive, trying my hardest to pull my ISO800 film back with a film picker so I could load it for some night shots of the market.  Sometimes I just couldn't get it and gave up and loaded a new film! 

How often do we actually change our ISO?  I know that we can do it far more quickly and easily with digital (one of teh reasons for me changing to digital), but I tend to leave my camera at ISO 100 (or 200 now with the D300) and work with that as my walkaround.  I can usually find a shutter speed and aperture to suit. 

The only time I change the ISO is when I'm set on composing specific images such as landscapes, sunsets, wildlife etc, or like today when I'm heading out to take a photo for a magazine cover when I'll choose the lowest ISO possible and use filters if needed. 

As I would have selected a film for such images I select the ISO setting on my camera.  I certainly don't mess about changing it for every shot and  I'm wondering how many others do this?  Or do you change your ISO for every shot? 

The joys of digital

 

---

The light in the UK is often less than good. I'm not talking about taking landscapes etc. just about bird photography which was the subject of` the photo in question. I've been out this morning from 6.30am in mainly bright sunshine - ISO mainly set at 400 dropped to 200 for swan shots [100 is disabled when highlight priority is set]. Just`flicked through the shots and there's a wide variety of settings - my main priority is  to ensure sufficient shutter speeds,and the maximum possible allowing for altering aperture where more DOF is required - and even in  sunshine trees can provide gloomy backgrounds. Such a big thing is made of a cameras low noise/high ISO abilities -  why restrict yourself to the lowest? If you're using flash or photographing`flowers or  people then fair enough.
And of course pros usually have fast lenses - many amateurs are stuck with a maximum of f5.6 or more.

---

a few mediocre pics

when i first took them pictures of the hawk i was new to shooting with a slr. with reading what you guys are saying. im starting to learn on what settings. to use.  my Nikon 55-200mm lens is broke. and i had to get a new lens. so i got a tamron 70-300mm macro lens. i got it for more reach. but i have a new question . do you think this is a good picture?

---

D40 18-55MM 55-200MM VR Tamron 70-300MM
Canon S3 IS
Canon A570 IS
Kodak Z710

    It is the third picture you shot I see and I notice one thing. Your main subject is always in the middle. Have you heard of the rule of the third? If not, I will try to explain or leave it to another member of this forum. Anyway, I think you should try to experiment and avoid only placing the main subject in the middle. On some occasion this is ok but if all your shots have the subject in the middle, you will soon discover that it will get boring.
By the way, keep writting your settings, that tells a lot.
I remember you saying you shot with white balance set on cloudy. If you mention this, it probably means that white balance is still very important to... because you shoot in JPEG. Am I right?