Hi all. I've been debating this for some time now, and can't seem to answer this myself, so I thought you all might could be of help. When using my XSI, I never use LiveView at all, always the viewfinder, period, and when I depress the shutter halfway, I wait for my focus beep, and then I adjust the exposure until my "needle" is perfectly in the center. Very basic stuff here, that we all know and do. Now, when reading the C&C post on here, one of the biggest critiques that I see is either the image is "under exposed" or "over exposed", which is true at all times for the given image, but what if you recieve that critique, which I have in the past, but when you took the photo, according to your camera, it's exposed perfectly for the given light, etc... I've heard people say "expose for the sky" here before. Would that mean to basically aim the lense at the sky, put the needle dead center representing proper exposure, then aim the camera at what you were going to shoot originally? I'm posting two examples below. Both were taken a few weeks ago, both were outdoors, and both were in the same location. These were actually just test shots, so no C&C required, as they're not meant to be good. I was mainly trying to see if I could focus in on these small weeds, or whatever you'de like to call them. Notice in this first shot.... the sun is out in full (late afternoon), and the exposure seems dead-on to me. You can really see alot of detail in everything. Now for the second. This shot was taken almost in the same spot, but turned around completely, heading in the other direction, but a cloud had went over and provided some shade. Now to me, this shot is under-exposed, with hardly any detail at all, but is that true? and if so, why? According to my camera, it should be perfect, and I know that the shade did this, so does that make it a simple lighting issue that can't be fixed? Would it be fair to say that lighting and exposure are the same thing, or at least, very close? I was using a polarizer for both of the shots also, could that have helped make this happen? I know I sound absolutely brand new here again, but, I'm just staring to notice this on alot of my outdoor shots, particularly with flowers and plants, and particularly when dealing with shade. So, if one can "expose for the sky" can one "expose for the shade"? Thanks in advance for the help.