Struggling with my new DSLR

[Prince-Myshkin]

Okay, so I've been using a Nikon f801s for the last few months and have loved it. Got to grips with the controls and loved the feeling of having pretty much exactly what you see in the viewfinder replicated in prints. So the other day i splashed my student cash on a D3000. I'm very happy with it in general, but today i had a real problem. I wanted to capture a blooming bush, with a green field behind and the sun setting. However, the image I had in the viewfinder could not be replicated, whatever I did with the settings.

http://my.picresize.com/4CEN6WX5JK/0EQYQVML9MSF5CY1IPBP

Here you can see the green foliage in the foreground and field behind

http://my.picresize.com/6HHA3D1V9B/JKK59NKVA8GRKM3PJIZ1

Here you can see the sunset

http://my.picresize.com/IR8F0ILL4D/A9UTN2RWUQ5BT3LXAXVG

This was about as close as I got but still horrible


Any idea what I was doing wrong? I was looking to make an image like this... http://www.flickr.com/photos/phitar/135268816/in/set-244401/


How can you do such? Thanks in advance guys.

 

[Ian W]

Basically, it's doing that because you're either metering off the sky or the foreground. The exposure can be right for only one at a time, thus you lose the detail in the other part of the photo.

You can manually set the exposure to meet in the middle or use an ND Grad filter which will reduce the light entering the camera from the sky and prevent it from being 'blown'.

HTH

 

[petersmart]

Apart from the fact that your pics were on their side, the dynamic range of the scene is too high for your camera to capture in one exposure.

About the only way to get the picture you probably envisage is to create a HDR picture.

To do that you need to take three pics with one exposed for the sky, one for the mid tones and one for the bush.

Obviously you need a tripod for this as all shots are then combined in a special program like Dynamic Photo HDR or Photomatix.

This is such a picture:

​

In this pic the dynamic range was too great for 1 exposure so I took 3 shots and then combined them.

In this way I have detail in the sky, the castle and the foreground.

 

[Baz777]

Agree with Ian, you can only expose for either the foreground or the sky.

If you are shooting into the sun then it’s best to metre for the sky and select a foreground or object, such as a tree, that will add interest but will be in silhouette.

The other shot you are comparing yours to has even lighting, possibly with the sun behind the photographer.

 

[Prince-Myshkin]

Apart from the fact that your pics were on their side, the dynamic range of the scene is too high for your camera to capture in one exposure.

About the only way to get the picture you probably envisage is to create a HDR picture.

To do that you need to take three pics with one exposed for the sky, one for the mid tones and one for the bush.

Obviously you need a tripod for this as all shots are then combined in a special program like Dynamic Photo HDR or Photomatix.

This is such a picture:

​

In this pic the dynamic range was too great for 1 exposure so I took 3 shots and then combined them.

In this way I have detail in the sky, the castle and the foreground.

Amazing. That might be a little beyond me at this point but will definitely have to give it a shot! It seems I was perhaps being a bit too overambitious by the sounds of it.

On somewhat of an aside, similar to the one i linked above i was very interested in this photo here http://www.flickr.com/photos/phitar/322963747/in/set-244401/ with regards to how one achieves such a rich and sharp image. Often i find digital a bit bland at first, would this be down to some very good editing?

Unfortunately I can't currently afford anything like Photoshop:thumbsdown:

 

[Ian W]

I don't see anything particularly special about that last picture.

I mean, it's a great shot but there's no reason why you shouldn't be able to capture the same. As you say it may have been played with a bit to increase the vibrance / saturation on photoshop but you can do that with free software too.

I bought Photoshop Elements 8 which you can get for £35 as linked to on the forum somewhere or download the likes of Gimp for free

 

[Les McLean]

Amazing. That might be a little beyond me at this point but will definitely have to give it a shot! It seems I was perhaps being a bit too overambitious by the sounds of it.

On somewhat of an aside, similar to the one i linked above i was very interested in this photo here http://www.flickr.com/photos/phitar/322963747/in/set-244401/ with regards to how one achieves such a rich and sharp image. Often i find digital a bit bland at first, would this be down to some very good editing?

Unfortunately I can't currently afford anything like Photoshop:thumbsdown:

Please, please, please get to know your camera first, learn about exposure, light and how to manage light. Get the basics right.

HDR images very rarely look good (IMO), you are far better getting your exposure right in camera.

You have taken some important steps by realising you weren't doing something correct, resulting in those incorrectly exposed images. Go to the library, scour this forum, look in the tutorials section, ask questions, it's a friendly forum and folk are usually more than happy to help out.

You don't need all the bells and buzzers of the full blown Photoshop, Photoshop Elements is reasonably priced , and will do all the post processing you need.

It's a steep (but very enjoyable) learning curve to get to the point where you can take images like your examples, but you need to learn to walk before you can run.