Mother and Daughter
by Falc

Comment:
I am very sorry this didn't ribbon. Of all the photos in this challenge, I felt this was in the top three. Don't let 3 ribbons make you complacent! Go for the gold!!!

Looks like you're a diver. We should trade stories sometime.

My Family
by beamsclan

Comment:
Congratulations on your top 20. I gave it a very good score and hoped it would ribbon. Under rated by voters in my opinion!

So you think im cute do you !! Ok snap away while I pose .
by trish

Comment:
Bigger, please. Else i can't see the details!

Tweak the focus just a little ...
by Bebe

Comment:
Should have tweaked the focus just a little ...

Polkadotted Seahorse
by cowcollect

Comment:
Bigger would be better!

The Zoo, there's no place like it!
by Photogirl_in_Vancouver

Comment:
Please, please, please ... make this bigger!

NIKON Photographers taste Goo-o-od!!
by Di

Comment:
Not half as good as Canon photographers!!!!!!!!!!

Replaced by the Tucson
by jbsmithana

Comment:
I believe ths was under-rated by voters. The planks in the hull do a nice job of leading the eye to the Tucson. It's a good example of the technique and ought to have scored a bit higher in my opinion. I gave it a higher score anyway.

P5090048-(resized).jpg
by David.C

Comment:
You've done a good job commenting on exposure, working backwords to determine what you did that yielded those results, and reasoning forward to what you would do differently next time. Note to our mentor group: This is an excellent habit to get into. It will help you improve over time.

On the scale of 1 (bad) to 10 (good) this is closer to 10 than to 1. The under exposed background does no damage at all and makes a nice frame around the subject flowers. You've lost some definition in the flowers you might have preferred to keep. Not terrible but there could have been a marginal improvement.

Your choice of Spot metering was excellent since your subject was significantly brighter than the background and it gives you the best chance for correct exposure. Do you think center weighted average whould have improved or worsened the result? Let me know your thoughts here.

I am curious about your choice of shutter speed and apereture. You indicated it was too bright for your camera. Yet, you used a pretty wide open lens (F/3.4) and a moderate shutterspeed (1/500). Could you have dealt with the brightness with a faster shutter? I suppose you chose F stops to narrow DOF. If not, could you have used a smaller lens opening? Obviously, I am sneaking up on a future topic.

Probably because your neice was shielding the flowers, it isn't obvious where the sun was. Where was the sun relative to you and your subject? Would a different camera angle yielded different exposure results?

Message edited by author 2005-07-15 20:32:09.

P4130033 (resized).jpg
by David.C

Comment:
David, firstly thanks for posting your SOOTC original. This is what we need if we are going to work together to achieve predictably good exposure. Secondly I like the photo just as it is (and I have to say I love a quantitative girl!)

I agree with your analysis of the exposure. One of the things I like about this is that it has variety of exposure and good intense and well saturated colors. This will make it an intrinsicly more interesting photo. You can see it in the histogram with multiple spikes. And you can see the exposure bias (left shift) due to your use of a a micro-fibre gray card.

A fine job and a good model of good exposure.