This. I agree with all of it
On my D780, the default setting for āb1ā is 1/3.
Easy exposure compensation (b2) is set to āoffā.
Center-weighted area (b4) is set to 12.
Iām not sure what Easy exposure compensation is or does, and the help menu on the camera screen isnāt much help, but unless you suggest otherwise, Iāll leave it āoffā.
Full agreement, and sometimes itās better to concentrate on one tool and learn to use it, before buying the second and third one.
That sounds good, but if I were to follow this concept, I would still be using Windows with Adobe products, not macOS with DxO. Not only that, but over and over, just when I think Iāve learned something, the software is updated with a new version. Cars donāt replace trucks (or vice versa) and DSLR cameras donāt replace range-finder cameras, or vice versa.
Itās nice to have forums, such as this one, to help make decisions about things I donāt yet understand.
1 Like
Perhaps everyone except me already knew that the Nikon allows us to adjust the exposure in 1/3 stop increments. Now that I checked those settings on my D780, yes, it does. Sorry, I thought most people would understand my question. Iāll be more specific next time.
Ha! I wouldnāt want to do that. But my mental memory finds things that I donāt understand, even when Iām staring at them. I think thatās a good thing, but maybe people will just find me even stranger than they already do.
I was walking home after taking the earlier photo looking up at a crane, and I came up to my foot-bridge to cross a canal. Something caught my eye, but I couldnāt figure out what. This is with the D780 and my 28-70. I was seeing āsomethingā there, but I wasnāt sure what. So, I left the camera almost wide open, to get minimal depth of field, and made sure to include all the āelementsā of the scene that I was trying to figure out what exactly I had seen. I focused on the walls, that intrigued me.
This is the image, after editing. Lots of shapes and colors, with the buildings not as far out of focus as I had hoped for, and the trees and bushes framing the image. Iāll probably look at it in a week, and wonder what in the heck I was seeing, and why I even bothered to take the image. For better or worse, Iāll post it anyway. You can all tell me how silly/stupid the image is. Thatās OK.
_MJM0247 | 2022-10-30.nef (27.0 MB)
_MJM0247 | 2022-10-30.nef.dop (15.2 KB)
And to @Joanna, and anyone else who wants to try - next time you see a scene that catches your attention, for whatever reason, try to capture it in a photo that shows what it was that intrigued you, even if youāre not sure what it is/was. It has to be ānaturalā, not something you set up - something that you werenāt expecting to see, but there it was! Try to capture whatever it is/was about, that first caught your eye. Once you identify it, you can use all your knowledge of photography to create the best possible picture, but the thing that first caught your eye should be clearly visible.
Any camera is OK, b&w or color, itās trying to capture an image of what you were thinking, when you first saw it. Any and all tools in PhotoLab can be used to emphasize what you saw; you can exaggerate if you wish to.
My instant reaction was to change the crop to remove the water underneath and to place the āstartā of the bridge in the left corner, to provide a leading line into the rest of the imageā¦
Iām not sure about laving the sky on the right visible, so here is an alternativeā¦
Well, you were only using a 45mm lens, which is pretty short if you want to reduce DoF at f/4.
What did you focus on? I would have been tempted to try about ā of the way from the start of the left part of the bridge, so that the DoF would be more likely to cover just the bridge itself. The truth is, trying to reduce DoF with short lenses and with the building on the left coming towards you was very unlikely to work. Nice try though.
Well, not the next time but definitely a āgrab shotā taken in Feb 2017. No reframing and only the essential basic adjustments. The subject is the two ladies enjoying a chat in the evening sun.
And another one from Mar 2017. The anchors, rope, rail and bowsprit made a nice geometric design.Once again, no reframing and a minimum of adjustmentsā¦
I focused on the spot where the two sections of bridge came together. I ought to have done what you suggested, and the depth-of-field would get me more of what I wanted.
I like my original image, but I like your upper crop version more - the sky doesnāt bother me. The lower image doesnāt show enough āimageā for me.
Removing the water removes the reason for there being a big but the picture is better without it. I like that the lower left corner of the bridge goes right to the lower corner of the image. Iāve been trying to do that a lot. I like that you showed more ābridgeā. Much better than the way I cropped it.
Last thought - without the water, there is no purpose for the bridge, but the shapes and colors fit together better with the bottom of the image cut off. I hadnāt noticed that - I tried a lot of things, but didnāt cut out the water, as to me that was āpermanentā. I need to keep a more open mind. The way you did it (top image) is better. ā¦the lower image might have been better with a little of the water showing. I donāt like it as much as I like my own attempt. But the middle version āworksā best.
I like this image, but I keep wondering what was beyond the water. Lighting is awesome, especially in the hair! Without whatās beyond the water, it is very peaceful and relaxing. You managed to keep the detail in the āshadow areasā which is nice. I also like the way the water at the top right sort of wraps around their head, keeping me looking at the heads. It pushes my eyes back down again, even as I had been wondering what was beyond the water. ā¦and when I view it in a larger size, I notice how nicely you had used depth of field. In the smaller version, I hadnāt noticed.
I like this photo, even more so when I view it in the larger size, as there is so much āeye candyā to focus on. Very strange patterns in the water, I donāt think Iāve ever seen water like that. I wish I knew more about boats, so I would better understand all the different things in the photo. ā¦I wish I had boats like THIS near me, instead of the zillion dollar mega-yachtsā¦
If you have your notebook with you, you could take a note of why you took the picture.
Sometimes, we take an image because it fits a mood or thought we have and later, when the mood has changes, the image doesnāt make sense any moreā¦
Amen. Thatās a nice way to explain it. Usually, I go home, and download the photos immediately. So usually I remember what I was thinking - but not always. Writing it down in a notebook would be good for a lot of reasons, but I rarely have a notebook with me - I always āthinkā I will remember. Not so.
Not wanting to wake up the metadata police or hijack this thread with DAM functionality posts, this sounds like the perfect use case for one of the comment/ description free text metadata fields - no notebook required and you can make the entry at the point of viewing your image 
ā¦just add your thoughts as metadataā¦ IPTC headline and description fields to the rescue!
Mike, to me your picture of the builders. The story was the builder with the hammer. He was the one doing the work, working hard for his paycheck.
The picture with the crane I found very intriguing. First thoughts the cabling on the right shouldnāt be there but when mentally removing them. The picture became unbalanced. That was the first story I got. The second story was the shape of the cabling leading into the Jib of the crane which then led into the scaffolding. This made a lovely letter Z. The third story was the main part of the crane reaching for the sky and how much taller can it go.
To me a very unusual picture. All I can say is ānice oneā.
If I started the thread, there aināt no āmetadata policeā allowed, and anyone who wants to take the discussion in a different direction is free to do so. DAMā¦ Can you please elaborate? On my camera, with which I just captured an image, where and how do I find a metadata field to enter my thoughts? I didnāt know this was even possible.
Thanks - I was trying to capture the hammer, so that was my focal point as well. The other things you mentioned all showed up in PhotoLab. I too disliked the cables, but when I cropped them out, the whole image suffered. Somehow they balanced the image. I kept cropping, and un-cropping, and twisting the horizon, until I had something intriguing. You explained it in words better than I did in āthoughtsā. Now, when I look at it, I feel āoff balanceā. Itās no longer ārealā. I wish I had caught someone standing by the railing on the platform, but that might spoil the whole effectā¦
Someone recently sent me a photo of a bicycle, all decorated with flowers. The building behind it was photogenic, as was the street, and it could have been taken in 2022 or 1952. It was timeless.
There is a shop near me that has a similar scene - they put a bicycle out front, with flowers all over the bicycle, and going up to the roof and then off to the sides. Iāve taken the photo before, but it never looked good - the colors were muted, and I never got the right effect. I went back there Sunday, but the shop was closed, and it was going on 2pm so the light was coming from the wrong direction. I went there this morning a little before noon, and bingo - everything worked for me!
The mystery person who started this maybe can/will post her photo here. I like her photo because of the location, and the bicycle looks timeless. I took several photos today, and this one was the best angle. I almost got myself included in the reflection on the glass - that would have been a no-no.
I think last time I used my Leica, and the colors were more muted. This was with my D780, and itās the exact result I was hoping for!!
_MJM0257 | 2022-11-01.nef (30.8 MB)
_MJM0257 | 2022-11-01.nef.dop (13.8 KB)
VERSION 2 (after looking at my friendās photo againā¦):
