Trees and sky

[crawdaddio]

I am struggling to find good landscapes and then learn how to shoot them. Any advice would be great.

Thanks for looking.

 

[woodsac]

Well, I wouldn't say you're struggling...you're doing fine :mrgreen:

I'm not sure how to give advise :scratch: I try and picture what it will look like after the post work. Even though the scene has natural beauty, you can't always capture it to it's full extent. So most scenes require some post work.

I almost always underexpose slightly! Landscapes are a great time to remember the rule of thirds. It's not mandatory, but I usually try and off-center my main subject. Or, I adjust the aperture to focus on the subject and draw your attention to it. I'm no pro and don't know if any of that helps? That's just what I do when I go out. Oh...also try a different pov. Like try and shoot from a lower or higher spot than normal and see how it looks. Lots of my landscapes are shot from 'knee' height

 

[woodsac]

One more thing...
Try and find contrasting colors. They help to set different objects apart and are appealing to the eye. Like your field and sky shot. Sure it's just a boring field, but the way you captured it with the bright blue sky really brings out the interesting colors of the field

 

[crawdaddio]

Thank you for the pointers. One question for you, if you would be so kind. How do YOU usually meter? We'll take your last post here as an example (great mountains and skies). Do you generally use the matrix metering? Or center weight the foreground and slightly underexpose that reading? (Speaking strictly of landscapes of course) It might also help me put it into context if I knew what camera you were using.

Thanks again for the tips, they will help me.
GREAT shots on yuor last thread BTW, I meant to comment but got side-tracked.

 

[woodsac]

Thank you for the pointers. One question for you, if you would be so kind. How do YOU usually meter? We'll take your last post here as an example (great mountains and skies). Do you generally use the matrix metering? Or center weight the foreground and slightly underexpose that reading? (Speaking strictly of landscapes of course) It might also help me put it into context if I knew what camera you were using.

Thanks again for the tips, they will help me.
GREAT shots on yuor last thread BTW, I meant to comment but got side-tracked.

Canon 350D...
I always use evaluative metering for my landscapes. I feel like it helps me better meter any bright light that may be off to one side of the frame. I noticed that when I use center weight that my shots are always either over/underexposed depending on how it's framed. Does that make since? If my subject is dark and occpies a lot of the frame, then any bright area is extra bright, and vice versa. Since the main sensor is based at the center AF point (regardless of how it says it works) I will check the reading on the brightest part of the frame, then check it again on my subject and adjust accordingly.

If I just babbled and you don't understand, let me know


And thanks for the comments!

 

[crawdaddio]

Thanks for the babble. J/K. Kay, I got it. I assume your 'evaluative meter' is canon speak for my 'matrix meter'.

Thanks again.

Rock on.....................

 

[woodsac]

Thanks for the babble. J/K. Kay, I got it. I assume your 'evaluative meter' is canon speak for my 'matrix meter'.

Thanks again.

Rock on.....................

I think I read somewhere that they serve the same purpose, but hopefull someone else will chime in here :mrgreen: