Why does this happen?

[merovingian]

Not sure if there's a beginners/idiots forum I'm sure this question should go there.

I'm having trouble with my settings.

I can either get a decent looking sky with a dark foreground.

Or, a totally white sky with a nice detailed foreground.

Why does this happen??????????:o

I need a fast crash course as I'm off to California on Monday!!!! Easy explanations please!!
Thx.

[swapnali]

Check your metering mode.
It may be on spot metering. I don't know what metering modes available in your camera. but your manual should tell that very clearly.
Choose the mode, where it evaluates the light on overall frame.

[neil_r]

By asking that question you demonstrate that you really need to get a better understanding of exposure. You wil get many answers here that may help you but I really recomend that you buy, read and understand this book

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Understanding-Exposure-Photographs-Digital-Camera/dp/0817463003/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1237035185&sr=8-1

It will put you in a much better position to develop as a photographer.

[Ook]

Depending on the time of day, the difference in brightness levels between the sky and the foreground may be just too much for the camera to capture. If that's the case, either parts of your foreground will have to be totally black, or parts of your sky totally white.

To get around this, your options are something like a graduated neutral-density filter, which you can position to darken the sky but not the foreground, which will bring everything closer together brightness-wise, or you can employ flash if your "foreground" is something like a person. You can only light so much area with flash, however.

Hope this helps.

Edit; I as well suggest taking a look at Peterson's book linked above. I found a copy in my local library.

[merovingian]

Thanks guys, it was all in the metering mode.
In this case, Evaluative metering was the one that got it right!

I think you can read all the books you want, it's the taking of shots, experiencing trial and error of all the different modes then you actually learn.

[neil_r]

Thanks guys, it was all in the metering mode.
In this case, Evaluative metering was the one that got it right!

I think you can read all the books you want, it's the taking of shots, experiencing trial and error of all the different modes then you actually learn.

True, but you need understand the fundamentals before you start. You could not really get in a car with no idea of how it works and pick it up, you need to understand the relationship between gear ratios and speed and breaking distance, once you do, practice may well make perfect. By the same token fully understanding the relationship between shutter speed, aperture and light can really help when you are starting out. Remember no pain no gain, read study, and take pictures. It will be worth it.

Hit and hope may well work but understanding the theory is more consistent than getting lucky ;-)

[PhotosGuy]

Why does this happen This shows how the subject can affect the exposure & why manual keeps me worry free:
Post #47 (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=5191658&postcount=47)
Click the "Thread: (thread title)" link at the top-right if you'd like more info on the subject.

[tzalman]

Thanks guys, it was all in the metering mode.
In this case, Evaluative metering was the one that got it right!

I think you can read all the books you want, it's the taking of shots, experiencing trial and error of all the different modes then you actually learn.
If you think Evaluative metering solves the problem of inadequate dynamic range, you have a whole lot more trial and error ahead of you. Especially error.
Read this: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=656767

[form]

It happens because the sky is often a lot brighter than the ground.

[DDCSD]

Here is a copy and paster from a post I made in another thread on this subject:

The horse shot?

Man, that is one pregnant horse! It doesn't look that bad. Looks like the focus may have fallen on the horse's torso, but it is hard to tell. The horse is pretty well exposed. The sky is blown out though. The only real way to avoid that would be to keep the sun at your back when shooting. Mid-day sun is pretty tough to get a nice overall exposure in.

Here is some examples. These photos were made one after the other, about 3 minutes separates the first image from the last one. Taken mid afternoon. The only thing that changes is the direction that the camera is pointed and where the sun is in relation to it and what I am metering off of. If the sun is behind me or mostly behind me, I get beautiful blue skies. If the sun is mostly in front of me or directly in from of me, I get ugly white-washed skies.

Pointing the lens towards the sun can also cause some lens flare, which can wash out an image and suck the color and clarity right out of it. This can happen even when you cannot see the sun in the viewfinder. A lens hood will combat this and is a great investment.

Here are my examples:
1. Pretty good looking blue sky. Metered for the building, although the sky would have metered about the same.
http://derekcecil.smugmug.com/photos/344461882_pzEJT-XL-0.jpg

2. 33 seconds later. Turned around about 110 degrees to my left. Absolutely no detail in the sky. Completely blown out. Building face is in the shade so the lighting is pretty flat. Again metered on the building.
http://derekcecil.smugmug.com/photos/344462248_6DGfF-XL.jpg

3. 67 seconds later. Turned about 90 degrees to my left here. You can see a bit more of that nice blue sky, but not as nice as it was in the first shot.
http://derekcecil.smugmug.com/photos/344462617_qTqD8-XL.jpg

4. 51 seconds later.Walked down the street a bit. Took another shot of the same building as the last shot. You can see that I am now shooting towards the sun a bit more, but not directly into it. This is giving me a mostly blown out sky, but there is at least a hint of blue left in it in the upper left corner of the image.
http://derekcecil.smugmug.com/photos/344461382_hjorD-XL.jpg

[DDCSD]

Here is an image from about 20 minutes earlier. Even better angle in relation to the sun here. The sky is beautiful here, and the light is falling nicely on the subject, although it is a bit harsh since this was mid-afternoon.

http://derekcecil.smugmug.com/photos/312636618_m9Tdz-XL.jpg

[S.Horton]

.......
I think you can read all the books you want, it's the taking of shots, experiencing trial and error of all the different modes then you actually learn.

That's true, but without the books, you won't know why.

[DDCSD]

That's true, but without the books, you won't know why.

I really agree with this statement. Reading about what to expect and then going out and seeing the results is a great way to learn.


I also suggest Understanding Exposure.

[Wilt]

If you think Evaluative metering solves the problem of inadequate dynamic range, you have a whole lot more trial and error ahead of you. Especially error.
Read this: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=656767

Yup. Evaluative merely changed the metering location used for the reading that the exposure was taken at!

The dynamic range required by the scene often forces the photographer to consciously SELECT what portion of the frame that they want to emphasize and get correct exposure, and the rest of the scene ends up 'falling where it may' in terms of exposure. When the dynamic range is too wide, one must often use means of decreasing the dynamic range of the scene. The use of a graduated neutral density filter is one way, using fill flash is another way, using selective post processing is yet another way of coping with excessive dynamic range.