Manual Exposure

tijuana taxi

tijuana taxi

Suspended / Banned
Messages
15,748
Name
Rich
Edit My Images
Yes
Picked up some magazines last week from the market stall that sells month or two old ones for a quid each. One of the photographic mags had the usual get to know your camera article discussing manual exposure.

Always read them, can never know everything and sometimes pick up useful tips, but this one left me a bit confused

It showed setting manual exposure by first selecting the chosen f number then adjusting the shutter speed until the exp comp meter indicated zero, surely this is only the same as using aperture priority

My understanding of manual was that you select a particular setting that the semi auto modes would not give you, for instance when you take a manual meter incident light reading

Could be I have just read too much or maybe the way I utilise the manual setting is wrong, any thoughts?

Cheers
Rich
 
There's no difference between Av/Tv and M modes if you're relying upon the internal meter. Even if it's to work around fluctuating lighting conditions (e.g. stage/disco lights) there's no difference between Av/Tv with AE-lock and using M mode. The only time M mode makes a difference is when you're relying upon an external meter (even if that meter is your eyes and judgement and a dose of sunny-16). Remember there was a time when there was no option and you had to rely upon an external meter, when the technology advanced using the internal meter with any mode was seen as a major improvement.
 
tijuana taxi said:
It showed setting manual exposure by first selecting the chosen f number then adjusting the shutter speed until the exp comp meter indicated zero, surely this is only the same as using aperture priority
Click to expand...

To a point.. either you or the article are missing an important point... Its what your pointing at when you get that setting... for example shooting a football match I will point at the grass as its a nice midtone simmilar to grey.. get the reading from that.. then shoot football.. some players might be in black kit other team in white.. might be bright white seats in background or a dark building.. my exposure is correct as i got it from the grass in exact way as you describe :)
 
To a point.. either you or the article are missing an important point... Its what your pointing at when you get that setting... for example shooting a football match I will point at the grass as its a nice midtone simmilar to grey.. get the reading from that.. then shoot football.. some players might be in black kit other team in white.. might be bright white seats in background or a dark building.. my exposure is correct as i got it from the grass in exact way as you describe :)
Click to expand...

Totally agree with that, unfortunately the article didn't mention it in the context of obtaining a reliable exposure reading no matter what
 
tijuana taxi said:
Totally agree with that, unfortunately the article didn't mention it in the context of obtaining a reliable exposure reading no matter what
Click to expand...
That's because the article is crap.

If you're short of something to do you can read the hundreds of threads on this issue. But it boils down to the same point, exposure modes alone don't change a thing. The photographer does this when they choose 'what' to meter.

Based on the metering conditions, sometimes an exposure mode will be more appropriate than an alternative mode. But in the grand scheme of things they're chasing the wrong question.

I've seen people get so tied up on this that they think using Manual will give them a better image than an auto mode, under identical conditions, with identical settings. :)
It's hilarious, and they've no idea why.
 
What Phil said^^.

There are no 'magic' settings which you can achieve manually which are not available in automatic modes.

Just about the only thing manual does for you is keep the exposure consistent as Kipax mentions in his post as usually you don't want differing subject matter to vary the exposure if it's all in the same light.


Steve.
 
unless you want to under or overexpose the scene. Underexposing a little helps with some colours, over exposing helps with other things. Expose to the right with digital and all that jazz.
 
essexash said:
unless you want to under or overexpose the scene. Underexposing a little helps with some colours, over exposing helps with other things. Expose to the right with digital and all that jazz.
Click to expand...

under and over exposing can be done in semi auto or manual... sorry dont see what your saying?
 
Ok let's talk manual. Are you shooting inside or outside. How bright or dull is it? Set your ISO, a good rule of the thumb is to use the lowest ISO that you can for quality that can. There is a caveat here, your ISO and aperture are intrinsically linked.

What do you want to shoot - a fast moving subject; do you want to freeze movement, somebody walking,running, waster, using a flash?.......or do you want to photograph a scene, maybe keep the whole vista sharp. Perhaps you want to keep the foreground in focus of blue the background, or visa versa? Exactly the same analogy could be applied to photographing a person.

Once you know what your shooting and his you want to visualise your image you either select the speed or aperture. So how do you want your image to look hi-key, low-key. Shadow detail ? We then add exposure compensation into the mix.

Manual exposure will allow you complete control I've your images but central to all this is gaining an understanding of the meter and how to read it. Exposure wise you won't go far wrong using an 18% grey card which you can pick up online for peanuts and are frequently given away in photographic magazines. Put it close to your subject and with Centre Weighted metering selected you won't be far off. That said, most camera meters are very accurate and you don't really need one these days.

There is no correct manual setting, no one size fits all solution but the settings that are right for the image that you want to capture. If it's greatly over or under exposed so detail is list or can't be recovered then that is the wrong setting !

Master the relationship between the ISO, aperture and speed and you will become a better photographer, you will be able to predict outcomes. There are plenty of articles on the web, You Tube etc. try searching on 'exposure triangle'.

Hope this helps, it's not as complex as it sounds. One day it will all just click into place.
 
Apologies for the typos iPhone and Internet connectivity coupled with rickety train journey !
 
Think of Manual as a 'Set & Lock' mode. That is its unique advantage - it won't change. There are lots of situations when that is desirable, and many where it is not.

To say that manual gives you more control or whatever is not really true. Using an auto mode with exposure comp or program shift will allow you to use whatever combination of settings you want in 99% of situations.
 
Manual mode is one of those things...... Linux, Mac, Man utd ... It's listed in the Nerd Dictionary :)
 
As with all the modes, it's a tool in the box. Handy when lighting is consistent and for conditions where the photographer wants complete control. As with all the other tools we now have, you need to know when and how to use it in preference to the other tools.
 
HoppyUK said:
Think of Manual as a 'Set & Lock' mode. That is its unique advantage - it won't change. There are lots of situations when that is desirable, and many where it is not.

To say that manual gives you more control or whatever is not really true. Using an auto mode with exposure comp or program shift will allow you to use whatever combination of settings you want in 99% of situations.
Click to expand...

If the camera is in auto the camera is in control - not the photographer !

I do use A,P or M mode but it's knowing when and where to use it but more importantly when not to. Incorrect exposures can be fooled by incorrect auto-metering in some circumstances 99% isn't always good enough if it's an important job.
 
Last edited:
The camera is NEVER in control - only the tog using the "Take the photo" button is in control :D

I use Manual all the time its needed, which is rarely, the rest of the time I apply a bit of knowledge & understanding to how meters work and use AP (and exp comp) cos its simpler & faster :)

I do see lots of comments/threads where newbies say they are now getting to the point of looking into how to use Manual Mode - like its something clever and an achievement - but they're approaching it the wrong way around :(

Like many (older folk) I kicked off in Manual Mode - cos there were NO auto ones - so in learning Manual first I quickly adapted to the ease of using auto modes; newbies would do better to START off with Manual and progress in time to a suitable auto mode, and yes even P is ok sometimes (y)

Dave
 
Blank_Canvas said:
If the camera is in auto the camera is in control - not the photographer !

<snip>
Click to expand...

Not true. That's what exposure comp and shift controls are for.

In fact, if you're using an auto mode with exposure comp applied, you are in more control than someone shooting in manual and just lining up the needles. Manual does not provide any more control, knowledge does.

Edit: disagree that manual is a better mode for learning. Until you first understand the basics of exposure and how the meter works, it'll lead to a lot of disappointment and 'learning by your mistakes' is a slow and painful process. Newcomers will do better with auto modes, be encouraged by success, then look at the camera settings and get a grasp of what's going on. Either way requires effort and practise though, there's no escaping that.
 
Last edited:
Blank_Canvas said:
Ok let's talk manual. Are you shooting inside or outside. How bright or dull is it? Set your ISO, a good rule of the thumb is to use the lowest ISO that you can for quality that can. There is a caveat here, your ISO and aperture are intrinsically linked.

What do you want to shoot - a fast moving subject; do you want to freeze movement, somebody walking,running, waster, using a flash?.......or do you want to photograph a scene, maybe keep the whole vista sharp. Perhaps you want to keep the foreground in focus of blue the background, or visa versa? Exactly the same analogy could be applied to photographing a person.

Once you know what your shooting and his you want to visualise your image you either select the speed or aperture. So how do you want your image to look hi-key, low-key. Shadow detail ? We then add exposure compensation into the mix.

Manual exposure will allow you complete control I've your images but central to all this is gaining an understanding of the meter and how to read it. Exposure wise you won't go far wrong using an 18% grey card which you can pick up online for peanuts and are frequently given away in photographic magazines. Put it close to your subject and with Centre Weighted metering selected you won't be far off. That said, most camera meters are very accurate and you don't really need one these days.

There is no correct manual setting, no one size fits all solution but the settings that are right for the image that you want to capture. If it's greatly over or under exposed so detail is list or can't be recovered then that is the wrong setting !

Master the relationship between the ISO, aperture and speed and you will become a better photographer, you will be able to predict outcomes. There are plenty of articles on the web, You Tube etc. try searching on 'exposure triangle'.

Hope this helps, it's not as complex as it sounds. One day it will all just click into place.
Click to expand...


Or point the camera and press the button. The number of times M is going to give anything better than Av must be very small (if measurable)
 
HoppyUK said:
Not true. That's what exposure comp and shift controls are for.

In fact, if you're using an auto mode with exposure comp applied, you are in more control than someone shooting in manual and just lining up the needles. Manual does not provide any control, knowledge does.
Click to expand...

You've missed my point completely, didn't read my post properly or didn't understood it. I mentioned Exposure Compensation (+/- EV) I think you must of just skipped that bit !

I apply it manually by dialling it in - I've been using that technique for 35years. It's not new ! - you don't need an auto mode to do that for you if you have the underpinning technical knowledge.

Did I not articulate that the photographer should be in charge not the camera ? Did I not suggest that by learning the relationship between the ISO, Aperture, Speed you would gain knowledge !

Sorry Hoppy you won't convince me auto is better, as you suggest. If your happy using it that's great but it does have it's flaws and isn't always perfect. I do agree with you that there is no substitute for knowledge though :-)
 
Blank_Canvas said:
Exactly Steve, you soon learn if you only have 12 frames on a roll of film.
Click to expand...
Do you know how patronising that sounds?

Do you know how many of the people who disagree with your 'in auto the camera is in control' statement have also spent many years shooting film in manual mode? And they all know that statement is crap.

Do you really appreciate that a monkey with a film camera in manual could get a 'correct' exposure due to the latitude of print film? So it's not really a great way to learn.

Manual only gives you total control if you understand what your meter is saying.

Auto modes only take away your control if you have no idea what your meter is saying.

So is it the mode that's important? Or intelligent use of the meter?
 
Phil V said:
Do you know how patronising that sounds?

Do you know how many of the people who disagree with your 'in auto the camera is in control' statement have also spent many years shooting film in manual mode? And they all know that statement is crap.

Do you really appreciate that a monkey with a film camera in manual could get a 'correct' exposure due to the latitude of print film? So it's not really a great way to learn.

Manual only gives you total control if you understand what your meter is saying.

Auto modes only take away your control if you have no idea what your meter is saying.

So is it the mode that's important? Or intelligent use of the meter?
Click to expand...

^^^ agree :)
 
Blank_Canvas said:
You've missed my point completely, didn't read my post properly or didn't understood it. I mentioned Exposure Compensation (+/- EV) I think you must of just skipped that bit !

I apply it manually by dialling it in - I've been using that technique for 35years. It's not new ! - you don't need an auto mode to do that for you if you have the underpinning technical knowledge.

Did I not articulate that the photographer should be in charge not the camera ? Did I not suggest that by learning the relationship between the ISO, Aperture, Speed you would gain knowledge !

Sorry Hoppy you won't convince me auto is better, as you suggest. If your happy using it that's great but it does have it's flaws and isn't always perfect. I do agree with you that there is no substitute for knowledge though :)
Click to expand...

I was simply responding to your comment "If the camera is in auto the camera is in control - not the photographer !" I got that point.

And I said auto modes were better for newcomers, nothing more.
 
Phil V said:
Do you know how patronising that sounds?

Do you know how many of the people who disagree with your 'in auto the camera is in control' statement have also spent many years shooting film in manual mode? And they all know that statement is crap.

Do you really appreciate that a monkey with a film camera in manual could get a 'correct' exposure due to the latitude of print film? So it's not really a great way to learn.

Manual only gives you total control if you understand what your meter is saying.

Auto modes only take away your control if you have no idea what your meter is saying.

So is it the mode that's important? Or intelligent use of the meter?
Click to expand...

Phil,

I was one of them. I spent years with film. Long before digital photography shooting manual. My first camera didn't have a meter. It was a Lubitol I was about 16. I learned through trial and error. I used to develop my own prints. Not a great way to learn and I never said it was ! I can see how it came across though. I certainly wasn't advocating it to be a good way of learning. One of those post taken out of context.

I did say if the camera is in Auto mode then it's doing the thinking. The photographer doesn't have to ! That's the problem. I'm advocating the photographer is in charge of the camera and does the thinking not the other way round....

I don't disagree with your comment about the meter. I've covered that in other posts.

The problem with learning photography on automatic modes is that it becomes familiar. You get used to it and because it works (to a degree) you stick with it. How many car drivers who possess an 'automatic' licence ever progress to learning how to use a manual gearbox?

Such is the importance of taking correct exposures, photographing in manual mode is still taught in the Armed Forces and also to Crime Scene Investigators (or Scenes of Crime Officers as we used to be called) because automatic modes can be flawed. There is no margin for error. You can't just go back and recreate a crime scene or fatal RTC. Other modes are introduced (A, S) modes only when competence has been demonstrated.

I have seen some horrendous wedding photographs where auto exposure modes have been used. For example a bride standing by a white wall. Illuminated by sunlight Her face plunged into darkness because the meter only understands the white wall and forgets the bride. No thought given to spot metering, incident metering of even fill in flash. No thought whatsoever, just Auto exposure modes used because the camera can work it all out ! - I'm not advocating that at all. Far from it the complete opposite. This is clearly wrong the Photographer needs to interpret the information and apply it to the camera.

Hopefully that makes more sense and puts some context around that comment.
 
Blank_Canvas said:
Phil,

I was one of them. I spent years with film. Long before digital photography shooting manual. My first camera didn't have a meter. It was a Lubitol I was about 16. I learned through trial and error. I used to develop my own prints. Not a great way to learn and I never said it was ! I can see how it came across though. I certainly wasn't advocating it to be a good way of learning. One of those post taken out of context.

I did say if the camera is in Auto mode then it's doing the thinking. The photographer doesn't have to ! That's the problem. I'm advocating the photographer is in charge of the camera and does the thinking not the other way round....

I don't disagree with your comment about the meter. I've covered that in other posts.

The problem with learning photography on automatic modes is that it becomes familiar. You get used to it and because it works (to a degree) you stick with it. How many car drivers who possess an 'automatic' licence ever progress to learning how to use a manual gearbox?

Such is the importance of taking correct exposures, photographing in manual mode is still taught in the Armed Forces and also to Crime Scene Investigators (or Scenes of Crime Officers as we used to be called) because automatic modes can be flawed. There is no margin for error. You can't just go back and recreate a crime scene or fatal RTC. Other modes are introduced (A, S) modes only when competence has been demonstrated.

I have seen some horrendous wedding photographs where auto exposure modes have been used. For example a bride standing by a white wall. Illuminated by sunlight Her face plunged into darkness because the meter only understands the white wall and forgets the bride. No thought given to spot metering, incident metering of even fill in flash. No thought whatsoever, just Auto exposure modes used because the camera can work it all out ! - I'm not advocating that at all. Far from it the complete opposite. This is clearly wrong the Photographer needs to interpret the information and apply it to the camera.

Hopefully that makes more sense and puts some context around that comment.
Click to expand...
We agree on all but one thing; you blame the auto mode for the photographer not thinking. I blame the photographer.

And I do this because whether the camera is on auto or manual, the same thoughtless photographer will take the same badly exposed images. And a photographer who learned the craft, will not make those mistakes. Just as I posted in my first post in this thread (and in many others), the mode has virtually no influence on whether a shot is well exposed or not. Only the photographer is to blame/congratulate.
 
I guess maybe I didn't understand the original question.
When in manual mode you have to choose your settings based on something and it's NOT the meter. There are numerous combinations of settings that will make the meter happy but they will all result in different images.
If shooting something moving you will probably start w/ a desired SS just like S/Tv.
If shooting something slower you will probably start w/ a desired aperture just like A/Av.
And then you balance the remaining factors to get the desired exposure. The more experienced you get you can set any of the settings "first" to get the desired result, but there will always be one factor that matters more than the others.

RE the rest of the thread. IMO, you have to know "how" to use manual and understand exposure. Beyond that, you have to be aware of how the camera is set/going to be set and what the results will be... it doesn't really matter what mode it's in.

The "problem" with priority modes is that they are a shortcut to a result that negates the requirement to understand... if you don't understand (or aren't aware) then you can't be in control.
 
BC, you're not making a clear distinction between exposure, metering, and how those things relate to camera settings.

In your example of a bride against a white wall - how would simply switching to manual help getting a good exposure there? And why could good exposure not be achieved with an auto mode?

Edit: I know you know the answer there, and that there's no disagreement. It's semantics really, but semantics are kinda important :)
 
Last edited:
Phil V said:
Do you really appreciate that a monkey with a film camera in manual could get a 'correct' exposure due to the latitude of print film? So it's not really a great way to learn.
Click to expand...

Exactly the principle Kodak used for box cameras with a single shutter speed and single aperture setting. Just give enough exposure for a dull day and you can get a usable image from anything taken within the normal range of daylight conditions.

Blank_Canvas said:
Exactly Steve, you soon learn if you only have 12 frames on a roll of film.
Click to expand...

I would rather have it right at the first frame!


Steve.
 
I'm sure the OP is learning a lot here. About this forum, if not photography...
 
Phil V said:
We agree on all but one thing; you blame the auto mode for the photographer not thinking. I blame the photographer.

And I do this because whether the camera is on auto or manual, the same thoughtless photographer will take the same badly exposed images. And a photographer who learned the craft, will not make those mistakes. Just as I posted in my first post in this thread (and in many others), the mode has virtually no influence on whether a shot is well exposed or not. Only the photographer is to blame/congratulate.
Click to expand...

Then we are in complete agreement as I articulated at the beginning and at the end of my post :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top