Raw

[Formatted]

Tomorrow I'm going to London, I'm doing a few things much majorly I'm looking to do some long exposure in the tube. There is going be a lot white and so I'm going to shoot raw so I can sort it out once I get back to the "lab".

Anyone got any advice with shooting raw? D5000 will be camera of choice.

As well as the tube, I'll be doing the usual touristy thing to do by visiting Greys of Westminster for a bit of a browse, as well as heading to the Natural History Museum to check out BBC Wildlife photographer of the year as well as the London Aquarium and along the way do some photography.

If anyone is interested
I'm also taking a F4 with a Fish eye for some more conventional shots.

Wish me luck!

 

[Overread]

Just remember the wolf is tame!!!! (if the BBC exhibition is still showing the shot)


Anyways as for shooting RAW (or jpeg) review your histogram for the best way to assess the exposure of the image. Keep all the in camera editing settings neutral since whilst they won't affect the RAW itself they will be applied to the JPEG image that is attached to every RAW shot (its this that the camera presents on the LCD and builds the histogram off for review).
When reviewing the ideal is to have as much of the histogram barchart on the right of the chart as possible without the line actually hitting the right hand side (a sign that you have overexposure in the shot - the left is underexposure). Even in RAW a fully over or underexposed area cannot be recovered - but you do have a bit more leeway than with a JPEG. eg have a read of the below

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...93693-tricks-using-raw-dont-burn-results.html

Also its not always possible to exposure with a lot of the chart to the right without getting blown results - so don't push yourself that the chart has to "look like something" in every different situation. Just make sure that its capturing as much image data as possible with each different shot and if you have time to adjust the settings do.

Also remember that tripods are not allowed to be used on the underground

 

[Formatted]

Also remember that tripods are not allowed to be used on the underground

Are mono-pods? That is what I was planning on using!

Just remember the wolf is tame!!!! (if the BBC exhibition is still showing the shot)

Ye it was removed, I'm a subscriber to the BBC Wildlife magazine have been for like 5 years now. So go ever year, last year saw it in the Netherlands, as I couldn't make it to London! Love it every year, but I'm disappointed that the shot one in the first place.

1. Its a camera trap (which are balls anyway and shouldn't be allowed)
2. "If" the wolf had to get used to the "flash" then its a no. The competition should have 0 impact on the enviroment
3. If it goes looking for food again on the farm and kills livestock, then it itself might be killed.

Alarm bells all over the place, shouldn't have been used!

 

[Overread]

Chances are you should get away with a monopod provided you're not trying to shoot in a busy/crowded environment - just be aware of your surroundings and try not to obstruct others.

As for the shot - I hold slightly different views;

1) traps - I have no problem with the use of a phototrap to capture an image of wildlife nor for the entry of such images into competitions. On the first level whilst some might try and argue that its some form of lazyness on the part of the photographer (they are tucked up a good distance away and not sitting out in a hide freezing their legs off) I would say it far from it.
On the first count accurage trap placement requires tracking skills, a display of deep understanding of the subject and good placement so that you can select the right location - the right angle and set the wire (or laser which is preferable) in the correct position to capture a shot. Capturing a fantastic shot is partly dedication as well as a good deal of luck

On the second count many of the rare animals shot with traps are shot in such a manner because if the photographer were to be there the animal would most likley not be there - certainly not within close range. Further many of these animals are nocturnal and predatory - the photographer in the environment is at a very high risk of personal injury (esp if they are taking pains to operate with minimal environmental change - ie no car to hide in - so as to not disturb the animal). And of course a "man killer" quickly sparks up fear and hunting as well as adding to the overall negative view of the animal in question

So in my view such images are worthy of entry. Very very few photographers will have the money to simply spray and prey with trapping setups though many might use lesser traps (eg trail cams) to help identify key and frequented locations as well as build up a time schedual for the animals daily life.

2) - 0 impact is impossible - pure and simple if the photographer is in the field there will be some form of impact on the surroundings. Unless they use highly remote methods (eg stalite or baloon) they are going to influence something in the environment. This might be a few brokend twigs and a hide through to the use of flash. I understand that to tame the wild animal is not the intent but the animal being used to flashlight is not that bad a situation (consider that they experience lighting in the natural environment).
Further once something is identified as a source of no danger animals will mostly ignor the possible threat.
The only way this becomes a danger is if the thing the animal is to get used to is a hunting/directly human thing - then there is a risk I agree that the animal might get too accustom to human things and come to wander too close an thus bring themselves into danger
The futher way is food supplies which are often used but have to be used with caution - one should not allow the desire to get the perfect shot to result in a regular supply of food being created in any one location (or area) that might cause a localised change in the behavour of the animals that might come to harm them when the food supply is taken away (eg feeding through winter should be kept up till the spring comes around).

3) I would agree with this yes and in the context we have to accept that the story told was false - however given a real situation the environment and the context of "farmers land" has to be taken into account. The farmers land could be arable farming in a very non livestock based area. In addition scale comes into things - a corner of a very large estate might very well allow such feeding without brining the animals any closer to active human activity.
This is the most hazy area mostly as its so highly dependant on the situtation in question.