This is only a practice in Exposure and metering.

[LightSpeed666]

Although this is not perfectly exposed, it was and is a lesson for me , for the day.
After reading about all of this extensively and constant practice, I try to learn something technical each day.
This image is nothing to write home about. That's not why I did it. It's not interesting, its not captivating. It is just a lesson in exposure for me. I am trying very hard to get things nailed down in all of this. I metered for this image and took the readings and combined for exposure. Right now I have a pretty good grasp on it. It's taking a while. I don't need a better camera. I need to learn to use light the right way and learn to use a camera the right way. I figure the rest will take care of itself at some point. This was done , in camera. The goal was to get the best possible exposure, and image, without post processing anything. And/or to get the image so close that very little post processing would be needed. Since I really don't have anything like photoshop and any really good post processing software.
I would like to have a full frame really badly, one of these days.

 

[Original katomi]

Nice to see someone working the camera rather than relying on the camera.
Nice pic

 

[Space Face]

Exposure looks pretty good.

The one thing I NEVER change in PP is the exposure. That feels like a failure/cheat to me so if I don't get it near right in camera I bin it (I do bit a few like).

Practice and understanding what you are doing and how it works all help.

 

[Designer]

I would like to have a full frame really badly, one of these days.

Since you included this sentence on your post, I'm curious as to why, exactly. What is it about a "full frame" that you want that you don't have now?

 

[LightSpeed666]

I would like to have a full frame really badly, one of these days.

Since you included this sentence on your post, I'm curious as to why, exactly. What is it about a "full frame" that you want that you don't have now?

A larger sensor, bigger pixels, more of them. The ability to crop with greater range if the need be. Possible higher image quality, better low light performance.

 

[Designer]

I would like to have a full frame really badly, one of these days.

Since you included this sentence on your post, I'm curious as to why, exactly. What is it about a "full frame" that you want that you don't have now?

A larger sensor, bigger pixels, more of them. The ability to crop with greater range if the need be. Possible higher image quality, better low light performance.

I see, thank you.

Larger pixels and low-light performance go hand-in-hand, but a larger sensor may or may not have larger pixels, depending on the design. I think the Nikon D850 could have smaller photosites (pixel size) than some older FX sensor design. This illustrates that sensor size alone does not automatically mean larger photosites.

Understanding Digital Camera Sensors

I don't see how the ability to crop has any bearing on the size of the sensor.

Higher image quality will depend on the lens, the sensor design, and the firmware combined, not sensor size alone.

There can be valid reasons for wanting a "full frame" camera, but you should probably know which camera you want and why.

 

[Ysarex]

Although this is not perfectly exposed,

Why do you say that? Why isn't it perfectly exposed?

it was and is a lesson for me , for the day.
After reading about all of this extensively and constant practice, I try to learn something technical each day.
This image is nothing to write home about. That's not why I did it. It's not interesting, its not captivating. It is just a lesson in exposure for me. I am trying very hard to get things nailed down in all of this. I metered for this image and took the readings and combined for exposure. Right now I have a pretty good grasp on it. It's taking a while. I don't need a better camera. I need to learn to use light the right way and learn to use a camera the right way. I figure the rest will take care of itself at some point. This was done , in camera. The goal was to get the best possible exposure, and image, without post processing anything. And/or to get the image so close that very little post processing would be needed. Since I really don't have anything like photoshop and any really good post processing software.

Something to read: class notes

Something to look at and consider: Do a side by side comparison of the photo you posted and this version of that photo.

Joe

I would like to have a full frame really badly, one of these days.

 

[K9Kirk]

Although this is not perfectly exposed,

Why do you say that? Why isn't it perfectly exposed?

it was and is a lesson for me , for the day.
After reading about all of this extensively and constant practice, I try to learn something technical each day.
This image is nothing to write home about. That's not why I did it. It's not interesting, its not captivating. It is just a lesson in exposure for me. I am trying very hard to get things nailed down in all of this. I metered for this image and took the readings and combined for exposure. Right now I have a pretty good grasp on it. It's taking a while. I don't need a better camera. I need to learn to use light the right way and learn to use a camera the right way. I figure the rest will take care of itself at some point. This was done , in camera. The goal was to get the best possible exposure, and image, without post processing anything. And/or to get the image so close that very little post processing would be needed. Since I really don't have anything like photoshop and any really good post processing software.

Something to read: class notes

Something to look at and consider: Do a side by side comparison of the photo you posted and this version of that photo.

Joe

View attachment 188799

I would like to have a full frame really badly, one of these days.

I can't tell just by looking at it what all you did but I suspect some de-hazing, which can help a lot with a bright, washed out appearance.

 

[Derrel]

Levels/black point,curves, exposure all can help a lot. Dehaze is a much newer editing feature. It came after clarity. Back in the bad old days we did not have either clarity or dehaze, and we had to rely upon the basics such as the levels and the curves and then later, the exposure correction slider. For my first 10 years in Photoshop I never used the exposure correction option, which I now use quite often. All of my photo editing software is behind the times and I currently have nothing that offers the dehaze function.

Just looking at your original image I can tell that it could be improved markedly by just simply doing the levels and a slight curves adjustment.

 

[Braineack]

The one thing I NEVER change in PP is the exposure.

One thing I ALWAYS change in PP is the exspoure.

 

[Designer]

My normal "workflow" is; WB, exposure, curves, level, crop, and finally a smidgen of sharpening. Takes about a minute. Any more than that, and it had better be a very special shot.