# Is manual mode overrated?



## Light Artisan

What's the point of shooting manual? I understand lighting is one key element, but other than a couple other fine circumstances I don't see the need personally.

It's how you learned so it's what you're used to?
Control freak?
Just to say you shoot in manual?

Discuss.


----------



## Robin Usagani

It is about consistencies.  Using auto or semi auto, your exposure will be all over the place.


----------



## usayit

yes it's overrated....  it's all about exposure.   How you get to the exposure is irrelevant.  

With that said I am in manual mode quite often simply because it works for me... next aperture priority.


----------



## Overread

Oh gods you didn't just make this thread did you - gah its far too early in the morning for such a thread!!

Myself I shoot in whatever mode I need to to get the best possible photo that I am able to get within the given lighting and the situation before me. This definition of best possible is of course determined by my "eye" and what I want to create in the photo.

Typically I shoot my general photography in aperture priority mode where I have direct control over both the aperture and the ISO and thus the depth of field of my photos. I then let the camera set the shutter speed based on the incamer meter reading.
I use exposure compensation to compensate this meter reading should the situation be one where the camera meter might be fooled (eg shooting snow or in strong sunlight) as well as in situations where I want to push a faster shutter speed at the cost of exposure.
I also keep an eye on the shutter speed and will adjust ISO and aperture to compensate to ensure that the shutter speed remains as fast as I need it to be.

This works for general and wildlife shooting. 

I use shutter priority a lot less, but in situations where I need a specific shutter speed (eg photos of planes with propellers where I want the proppeller action blurred) I then shift into this mode where the aperture is no longer the key setting. I'll also use this mode for grabshots - setting the ISO fast (1/500sec) so that I know I'll get a sharp grabshot of most moving subjects (or at least have a good chance).


Full manual I keep for any situation where I need control over both settings directly. For myself this is mostly in situations where I have flash dominated lighting and the camera is incapable of reading the flash light to meter for it. Thus my macro work is done totally in manual mode where I can set aperture, shutter speed and ISO and then let the flash (in ettl auto or in manual mode) make up the needed light for the exposure. 



In the end its not what mode you shoot in that is important - its that you both:

1) Learn to use each mode as well as possible
2) Choose to use the mode that will give you the best possible photograph (based on the lighting; situation and your creativity).


----------



## Josh66

I like it because it doesn't change.  The settings stay on whatever you put them on.

In every other mode, some setting is changing based on where you point the camera.


----------



## Robin Usagani

What Josh said. If you shoot with Aperture Priority I suggest you stay out of spot metering.


----------



## Overread

O|||||||O said:


> I like it because it doesn't change.  The settings stay on whatever you put them on.
> 
> In every other mode, some setting is changing based on where you point the camera.



Aye true, but if the lighting is changing in those different scenes then you'll want the settings to be changing to remain constant with the lighting presented. This can be important with fast changing lighting when the camera is far quicker to adjust than the human hand can ever be. 

Erose however raises the point quite clearly however that familiarity with a select working condition allows one to be far better ability to ballpark the settings that one can use. Controlled or natural this is going to apply and anyone with experience in a select area of interest will eventually know the rough values that they'll be able to work with. 
This is expect is why many more experienced photographers can become more heavy users of manual mode - they know what the settings will be so can predictively set them on the camera and get within a good degree of accuracy.


----------



## Robin Usagani

I wish they have a button to automatically set shutter or aperture to put exposure to 0 while in the manual mode.


----------



## chito beach

Schwettylens said:


> It is about consistencies.  Using auto or semi auto, your exposure will be all over the place.



Thats cuz you shoot canon :er:  LOL J/K

I shoot manual for much and Shutter Priority for fast action so I can use the 10 frames per second


----------



## ChadHillPhoto

IMO

Manual is what I use ALL the time. The reason, is within any given lighting environment I can predict and control exposure. 
Its also a matter of knowing I m in control while shooting for my clients.


----------



## Derrel

I frequently shoot my Nikons in *A* mode, which stands for *Awesome* mode. It works pretty well for me. I almost never use *P* or *Pokemon* mode....just...don't...feel..comfortable....with the *Pokemon* mode dialed in...

On my Canon 5D, which is my portaiture camra, I will use *Av* or *Avenger* mode about equally as much as *M* or *Masochist* mode.


----------



## usayit

Schwettylens said:


> It is about consistencies.  Using auto or semi auto, your exposure will be all over the place.



AE lock.
or
separate autofocus and exposure to two different buttons.   

For any given lighting conditions, take a single reading in whatever mode (Av,Tv,P), set exposure compensation to you liking, then leave it there....  Is that possible with your camera?

With the Canon 1 series, I was set to spot and mostly in either P or Av.  You can point the spot to several areas and take readings.  It would average the readings out and display each reading on a scale.  From that point the exposure was set and it would stay there until I reset it.  you can easily see where metered points would fall and which would go over and under.  I found it quite effective.  

I now do something similar with a handheld meter or I do it in my head.


----------



## Robin Usagani

I know you can AE lock. I am willing to use Aperture priority a lot more if i can AE lock for several shots until i say it not to!  Thats interesting Usayit.. tell me what to do with 5D.


----------



## usayit

Schwettylens said:


> I know you can AE lock. I am willing to use Aperture priority a lot more if i can AE lock for several shots until i say it not to!  Thats interesting Usayit.. tell me what to do with 5D.



Hmm...  Apparently, AE Lock will time out automatically on the 5D.  The closest I can find is to use custom function to separate AF and AE.  It keeps AE at the half press shutter and the * button on the back for AF.  As long as the shutter button is half pressed the exposure stays the same.   Use your thumb on the * to activate AF.  I don't shoot like this but I do know my cousin (mostly portraits) does this and it works for him quite well.

The AEL timer can be set to as long as 1 hour on the 1 series cameras...


----------



## Robin Usagani

Aw man.. yeah if i can lock it for 1 hour I would certainly use a lot of AV.  I like my half press to meter and focus.


----------



## Drake

Is manual overrated? I think it depends on one's attitude. Some shoot in manual mode and are right to say that this mode yields the best results, at least for them. Others treat the M letter like some kind of a religion, trying to spread the message that if it's not done in manual, it's wrong.

I shoot most of my photos in Av, because basically that way I've got the same control over the camera I do in M mode. The thing I think about first is usually the aperture. After I set it the way I want it to be, what's the point for me to go through the shutter speed scale and set it manually to be somewhere around the middle of the exposure indicator in OVF? In Av mode, whenever I want to take a shot, I get my camera out of the bag, set the desired aperture, meter, and the camera is already set to a roughly correct exposure. I can always fine tune it if I feel the need to. Aperture priority mode in combination with exposure compensation and exposure lock is just my way of shooting. I often use manual when the camera is on a tripod though.

I am not saying Av is the only way to go. It's only a way of shooting. It gets exactly the same results as manual mode. What's the reason of arguing which one's better? I am faster and more comfortable in Av, others are in M. Is it really that much of a difference?


----------



## usayit

Overread said:


> Oh gods



lol... you watch battlestar galactica?


----------



## ann

Manual, because that is how i was taught 63 years ago and it is just habit at this point.  However, there are times when I will use whatever the situation calls for; including (on my goodness She didn't do that) program mode.

For instances I was in New York last weekend and was using my iphone and my Olympus E-pen and put the Olympus in program mode as it was faster and the light was changing from minute to minute.


----------



## Ken Rockwell Fan

I only use manual mode when I absolutely have to. Most of the time I shoot in P or A mode and chimp the histograms and highlights.


----------



## Overread

usayit said:


> Overread said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh gods
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lol... you watch battlestar galactica?
Click to expand...


Yeps! The original though I never got to liking that new one they made (ok I kind of liked it ish, but they should have called it something else cause it wasn't Battlestar)


----------



## BKMOOD

Manual Mode is a needed and valuable tool in the photographer's toolbox.  Cameras, even the best of them, are only so smart and can be fooled in certain situations.  Those are the times you have to tell your camera what to do instead of the other way around.


----------



## 3bayjunkie

Light Artisan said:


> What's the point of shooting manual? I understand lighting is one key element, but other than a couple other fine circumstances I don't see the need personally.
> 
> It's how you learned so it's what you're used to?
> Control freak?
> Just to say you shoot in manual?
> 
> Discuss.



Sorry if I am repeating someone I didn't read all the posts in here.

Manual mode is best for shooting portraits with controlled lighting. This is because you will be able to control your exposure to your liking when using strobes or whatever your lighting may be.

most times other than portrait you would probably use Aperture priority mode so you can control your depth of field. 

However when photography a lot of action, sports for example, you would use Shutter priority so you can keep it at around 1/1000 SS. 

Then again when you are doing travel photography type stuff I always use Program mode so it does everything automatically (no flash) when walking around a city or wherever I am and don't have a lot of time to react to a good shot.


----------



## pgriz

Light Artisan said:


> What's the point of shooting manual? I understand lighting is one key element, but other than a couple other fine circumstances I don't see the need personally.
> 
> It's how you learned so it's what you're used to?
> Control freak?
> Just to say you shoot in manual?
> 
> Discuss.


 
Depends on whether Im creating or recording.  If the former, then Ive got a clear objective, and I want to control the light and the camera settings, so I shoot in manual mode.  If the latter, then Im effectively shooting snapshots, so I delegate some of the decisions to the camera.  Mostly Av mode, some Tv mode, and very rarely, P mode.  However, if Im in an area where the incident light is constant, then I will switch to manual mode (once Ive decided on a basic exposure), as it will avoid having variation in exposure due to different tones of subject matter.

Pretty much what every one else said before me.


----------



## table1349

Are manual transmissions needed in vehicles these days or are they just toys for those that want to feel like they are hot drivers?

Well if you are driving to work in your little urban setting or going to and from the store, well that automatic transmission is probably all you need.  

But lets say you want to get that large load of dirt up that steep hill to your home for some big project you want to do.  

If all you learned to drive was something with an automatic transmission pick a good company to do the job for you because you do not have the skills to get the job done yourself.  Me, I will get behind the wheel of that stick shift and do it my self because I have driven everything from a 3 on the tree to and 18 wheeler.  
Is manual overrated?  Are you a picture taker or a photographer?  If you can successfully shoot in manual then you don't just understand the basics, you can control the basics and get from them what you want.  

Kind of like that stick shift, understanding that you push down that far left peddle then move that little stick thingy into different places is a lot different from being able to do it smoothly and properly drive a manual transmission vehicle.  I drive an automatic, but I can drive anything still made.  I use Av, TV and Manuel, depending on what it called for, but I not only understand the basics of exposure I can put them to use in the way I want and envision.


----------



## PASM

Using manual-mode allows maximum creative control. That may not be necessary/practical for what you are doing, but it's good to have the options.


----------



## KmH

Today's digital cameras are like Swiss Army knives.

You have the really simple, inexpensive ones that come with 2 or 3 tools. (P&S)

You have the ones that come with every automatic tool known to man, and 1/2 of 'em you never discover are there. (entry -level).

And then you have the ones that only have the tools a knowledgeable photographer needs. (prosumer and pro)

:lmao:


----------



## usayit

Overread said:


> usayit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Overread said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh gods
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lol... you watch battlestar galactica?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeps! The original though I never got to liking that new one they made (ok I kind of liked it ish, but they should have called it something else cause it wasn't Battlestar)
Click to expand...


Frakkin cool...

I loved BSG.... but you have to free your mind from any connections from the original series.   Its the first thought that came to mind when I saw the word Gods.  


I also got a laugh when I figured out the background explanation for all the corners cut from the books and paper in the shows.


----------



## swimswithtrout

Over rated ?    No, if it works for you, fine.  

Under used ?   Yes 

I shoot Ap about 75% of the time, but there are always situations that demand an over-ride.  

You could just do it by using an exposure compensation, but at that point I just switch to M. 

For the first 10 yrs I was shooting a 35mm cam back in the mid 60's/70's, that's what I did.  There was no Auto anything on my cameras.  

After enough wasted film you started getting a pretty good idea of exposure. If you wanted more info and had the money, you carried a light meter.


----------



## dxqcanada

Manual exposure should only be used when you know the in-camera meter is going to give you the wrong exposure ... otherwise use Aperture or Shutter priority to have your own control over either property.

I think the biggest misconception is that Manual exposure gives you the most control ... if you set exposure manually to what the in-camera meter tells you is correct, then it is no different then using any automatic setting ... Manual exposure gives you the most control when you deviate from the norm.


----------



## Dominantly

I find it more difficult to use the automatic modes, manual seems to be the easiest of the bunch.
Now this may differ depending on the body you are using, and the ease in which you can manipulate your settings (IE D90 with two command dials).


----------



## Dominantly

dxqcanada said:


> Manual exposure should only be used when you know the in-camera meter is going to give you the wrong exposure ... otherwise use Aperture or Shutter priority to have your own control over either property.
> 
> I think the biggest misconception is that Manual exposure gives you the most control ... if you set exposure manually to what the in-camera meter tells you is correct, then it is no different then using any automatic setting ... Manual exposure gives you the most control when you deviate from the norm.


What about for a panoramic shot?
If you were taking 5 shots of a cityscape over a harbor, would you leave your camera in an automatic mode, or would you lock it down in manual to ensure consistent results? Just curious, as I would want Control and Consistency throughout the set.
 So I would/Have/Will/Do leave it in manual.


----------



## Josh66

dxqcanada said:


> I think the biggest misconception is that Manual exposure gives you the most control ... if you set exposure manually to what the in-camera meter tells you is correct, then it is no different then using any automatic setting ... Manual exposure gives you the most control when you deviate from the norm.


Although I kinda agree, I think it's more a case of people not being clear with their reasoning behind using it.

If you don't like the auto modes because you don't trust the camera, but you use the in-camera meter in M - that's just stupid.

What M does do though, is provide consistent results.  If you don't want to mess with exposure compensation, or you don't like the shutter speed or aperture changing every time you move the camera, manual is hard to beat.

Personally, I pretty much always use manual and spot meter.
I kind of evaluate the scene with the meter, then decide my settings.


----------



## table1349

dxqcanada said:


> Manual exposure should only be used when you know the in-camera meter is going to give you the wrong exposure ... otherwise use Aperture or Shutter priority to have your own control over either property.
> 
> I think the biggest misconception is that Manual exposure gives you the most control ... if you set exposure manually to what the in-camera meter tells you is correct, then it is no different then using any automatic setting ... Manual exposure gives you the most control when you deviate from the norm.



Then why AV, why TV, why not just full automatic all the time?  Manual exposure does give you more control.  The camera readings are not always correct unless you are always looking for that static, buy the book shot with the exposure the camera wants to give you.  

The control manual gives you is the ability to think past what the camera interprets as proper and allows the photographer to get the shot they want, not what the camera thinks they want.  *YOU* the photographer have to be in control, and to do that you have to have the knowledge base of concerning Aperture, ISO and f stop to understand and be able to visualize what modifying the settings means.


----------



## dxqcanada

gryphonslair99 said:


> The control manual gives you is the ability to think past what the camera interprets as proper and allows the photographer to get the shot they want, not what the camera thinks they want.  *YOU* the photographer have to be in control, and to do that you have to have the knowledge base of concerning Aperture, ISO and f stop to understand and be able to visualize what modifying the settings means.



Yes, it requires that the photographer understand how the camera/sensor will capture the image based on a given meter reading on a given subject based on a precalculated algorithm.


----------



## table1349

dxqcanada said:


> gryphonslair99 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The control manual gives you is the ability to think past what the camera interprets as proper and allows the photographer to get the shot they want, not what the camera thinks they want.  *YOU* the photographer have to be in control, and to do that you have to have the knowledge base of concerning Aperture, ISO and f stop to understand and be able to visualize what modifying the settings means.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, it requires that the photographer understand how the camera/sensor will capture the image based on a given meter reading on a given subject based on a precalculated algorithm.
Click to expand...



No it means not just understanding that precalculated algorithm, buy understanding what changing any one portion of that algorithm means and understanding which portion of that algorithm has to be changed to get the shot that the photographer wants, not what the camera wants to take.  To do that you need 1. knowledge and 2 the platform to use that knowledge, ie. Manual mode.


----------



## Dominantly

Rocket science it is not.

Middle gray, 18% reflectance, nanoo nanoo


----------



## kundalini

I learned how to use a camera shooting Manual.  I'm happy with it.  My Nikons allow me to quickly change aperture or shutter speed with my forefinger or thumb in 1/3 stops on the fly.


----------



## Dominantly

^ Exactly.


----------



## TGood

Using an old manual focus camera made me learn the basics of shutter speed, aperture, etc. I think it's a must for anyone to truly understand how the camera's setting affect the overall shot.


----------



## table1349

Dominantly said:


> Rocket science it is not.
> 
> Middle gray, 18% reflectance, nanoo nanoo


 
Houston, whe have a problem. 

Meters Don't See 18% Gray by Thom Hogan


----------



## altitude604

Dominantly said:


> I find it more difficult to use the automatic modes, manual seems to be the easiest of the bunch.
> Now this may differ depending on the body you are using, and the ease in which you can manipulate your settings (IE D90 with two command dials).


I mainly stick to Av mode... occasionally Tv. Probably would use M a little more often if I wasn't on an XSi body however.


----------



## manaheim

Artisan, you should do some digging.  You seem to be dragging up a lot of these old and massively-hashed-out topics.

BTW, you won't get reasonable answers from 99% of the people on internet forums to these kinds of questions because, like many things, most people advocate only what they are most comfortable with.

The real answer to all such questions is to use the tool that is most appropriate for the job, and to use every tool available to you if it makes sense to do so.


----------



## Light Artisan

manaheim, do you think I really care what the outcome is? I just want people to think about a given topic and post their thoughts. Maybe someone is shooting manual all the time and doesn't even know why, or on the flip side, maybe someone should be shooting manual and isn't... topics like this are good for discussion.

I figure this is a better discussion than half the threads started lately, at least this one deals with photography and has (until now) stayed on topic quite well.

Do a search!

You know what, had I done that I'd getted ragged on for digging up old threads. 6 of one, half a dozen of the other.


----------



## Village Idiot

Light Artisan said:


> What's the point of shooting manual? I understand lighting is one key element, but other than a couple other fine circumstances I don't see the need personally.
> 
> It's how you learned so it's what you're used to?
> Control freak?
> Just to say you shoot in manual?
> 
> Discuss.


 
I use lighting equipment for 90% of photography, so most of the time I have to have a certain shutter speed and I want my aperture to remain constant. I'm also starting to get more into composite shots that require mostly constant settings or a constant aperture with a changing shutter speed to expose other parts of the scene properly.


----------



## manaheim

Well, you'd get ragged on because I can statistically guarantee you that you responding to any given thread on any one of these kinds of topics would not only revitalize a long-dead thread, but would also add absolutely nothing to the overall conversation on said topic... because it's all been said... thousands of times.


----------



## Village Idiot

dxqcanada said:


> Manual exposure should only be used when you know the in-camera meter is going to give you the wrong exposure ... otherwise use Aperture or Shutter priority to have your own control over either property.
> 
> I think the biggest misconception is that Manual exposure gives you the most control ... if you set exposure manually to what the in-camera meter tells you is correct, then it is no different then using any automatic setting ... Manual exposure gives you the most control when you deviate from the norm.


 
By definition, having control over something is to have the power to guide of change. If the camera is doing it for you, then you don't have control of that setting. So yes, manual mode does give you the most _control. _Is it the easiest or most practical setting? It entirely depends on the photographer and the camera. Even when I'm not shooting with lighting equipment, I tend to use the spot meter, so my meter will jump all over the place depending on whether or not I'm lighting something black, white, gray, green, etc... and it won't necessarily expose the scene the way I want it to. So manual mode is generally what I stick with based on how I shoot and what I shoot.


----------



## jake337

Schwettylens said:


> What Josh said. If you shoot with Aperture Priority I suggest you stay out of spot metering.


 
Can you elaborate?  I do this all the time and am always using spot metering.  Much less now that I have off camera flash though.


----------



## Higgs Boson

I'll add in a question on this.  I like to shoot in M so the settings don't change.  Typically I will set my aperture to ensure the dof I want and then set a shutter speed that will keep me near 0 exposure for all my shots on that shoot.

Some pics will be 1/3 stop over or under but mostly they are all right there at or around 0.

My question is, does it really even matter?  With RAW and post processing, it is easily adjustable....Is there any reason to care if you're at perfect 0 for every shot (creative or not)?


----------



## Josh66

gryphonslair99 said:


> Dominantly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Rocket science it is not.
> 
> Middle gray, 18% reflectance, nanoo nanoo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Houston, whe have a problem.
> 
> Meters Don't See 18% Gray by Thom Hogan
Click to expand...




			
				from the link said:
			
		

> [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]ANSI standards          (which, unfortunately, are not publically published--you have to pay big          bucks to have access to them), calibrate meters using luminance, not reflection.



Do you (or anyone) know _which_ ANSI standard it is?  He never says in the article...

We have access to them at work, and I'd be interested in seeing it.
[/FONT]


----------



## Robin Usagani

I only suggest using spot metering if you really know what you are doing.  It requires you to do AE lock a lot.  If you dont really know what you are doing, you will have a set of photo on the same location, same light, with exposure all over the place from -2 to +2.  You wont be very consistent.  AE lock on most camera bodies is a pain.



jake337 said:


> Schwettylens said:
> 
> 
> 
> What Josh said. If you shoot with Aperture Priority I suggest you stay out of spot metering.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you elaborate? I do this all the time and am always using spot metering. Much less now that I have off camera flash though.
Click to expand...


----------



## kundalini

Schwettylens said:


> AE lock on most camera bodies is a pain.


Must be a Canon thing. Mine is just left of the AF-ON button, which is my prefered method to focus.


----------



## Light Artisan

I didn't realize consistency was so important, I guess I personally don't care if the exposure changes, so long as I like the end result. Lighting changes, exposure should too.


----------



## Robin Usagani

Kundalini, same as Canon. But then you need to make sure you are metering from same spot over and over. I hate doing too much recompose or mess with EC.  I would do a lot more aperture priority if I can lock the AE for multiple shots.



kundalini said:


> Schwettylens said:
> 
> 
> 
> AE lock on most camera bodies is a pain.
> 
> 
> 
> Must be a Canon thing. Mine is just left of the AF-ON button, which is my prefered method to focus.
Click to expand...


----------



## jake337

Schwettylens said:


> I only suggest using spot metering if you really know what you are doing. It requires you to do AE lock a lot. If you dont really know what you are doing, you will have a set of photo on the same location, same light, with exposure all over the place from -2 to +2. You wont be very consistent. AE lock on most camera bodies is a pain.
> 
> 
> 
> jake337 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Schwettylens said:
> 
> 
> 
> What Josh said. If you shoot with Aperture Priority I suggest you stay out of spot metering.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you elaborate? I do this all the time and am always using spot metering. Much less now that I have off camera flash though.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

 
Ok I see what you are saying. I use it with AE lock indoors at family get togethers and whatnot when the change in light is small.  You just have to watch your shadows I guess and be more aware of the lighting on your subject. 
  Is there any difference in exposure when using flash and spot metering?  Should i be using full matrix metering more often?  I turned off all the options on my d90 (d-lighting, noise reduction, etc..).  I figure if the camera is not helping me then the exposure is more up to me and I can learn from my mistakes.


----------



## jake337

Schwettylens said:


> Kundalini, same as Canon. But then you need to make sure you are metering from same spot over and over. I hate doing too much recompose or mess with EC. I would do a lot more aperture priority if I can lock the AE for multiple shots.
> 
> 
> 
> kundalini said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Schwettylens said:
> 
> 
> 
> AE lock on most camera bodies is a pain.
> 
> 
> 
> Must be a Canon thing. Mine is just left of the AF-ON button, which is my prefered method to focus.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

 

I know I hated on my d90 how the AE lock would turn off when the camera went into stand by.

I just changed the amount of time it took for standby to the longest amount and make sure I turn off the camera if I'm not taking pictures for a few minutes.


----------



## Josh66

jake337 said:


> Is there any difference in exposure when using flash and spot metering?  Should i be using full matrix metering more often?  I turned off all the options on my d90 (d-lighting, noise reduction, etc..).  I figure if the camera is not helping me then the exposure is more up to me and I can learn from my mistakes.


If the flash is going to be the primary light source, just ignore the meter all together - it's not going to tell you anything.

If you're just using fill flash, just meter normally and use the flash to fill in the shadows.


----------



## Dmitri

It is all over rated. Just stick it in AUTO, always use the on-camera flash, and don't bother with post processing - that's just cheating anyway.


----------



## jake337

O|||||||O said:


> jake337 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is there any difference in exposure when using flash and spot metering? Should i be using full matrix metering more often? I turned off all the options on my d90 (d-lighting, noise reduction, etc..). I figure if the camera is not helping me then the exposure is more up to me and I can learn from my mistakes.
> 
> 
> 
> If the flash is going to be the primary light source, just ignore the meter all together - it's not going to tell you anything.
> 
> If you're just using fill flash, just meter normally and use the flash to fill in the shadows.
Click to expand...

 
Ok thats what I've been doing, thanks.


----------



## Dominantly

gryphonslair99 said:


> Dominantly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Rocket science it is not.
> 
> Middle gray, 18% reflectance, nanoo nanoo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Houston, whe have a problem.
> 
> Meters Don't See 18% Gray by Thom Hogan
Click to expand...

Don't know if I buy it.


----------



## Josh66

Dominantly said:


> gryphonslair99 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dominantly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Rocket science it is not.
> 
> Middle gray, 18% reflectance, nanoo nanoo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Houston, whe have a problem.
> 
> Meters Don't See 18% Gray by Thom Hogan
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Don't know if I buy it.
Click to expand...

Without seeing the spec, I don't know how we can say one way or the other.

I can print it out at work, but I have to know the number.

There are hundreds of thousands of ANSI specs...  Without a number there is no way for me to find it.

I could probably search for photography related terms, but even that would still likely yield thousands of results...

edit
I've search on Google trying to find the number of the spec, no luck so far.  If anyone has any luck finding the number, post it here and I'll look it up at work.

I'm pretty sure it will be illegal for me to scan and post the print I make at work - but I don't think there would be any issue with me reading it and sharing my new knowledge with you.


----------



## pgriz

There are two articles that seem to take this a bit further:

david.spielman.com/Gray_Card/*ANSI*_PH3_49_1971.PDF

and

DPanswers: What Does Your Meter Meter?


----------



## Josh66

^^^
I'll look that spec up tomorrow at work, but I have a feeling it's going to be very boring reading.  

That PDF seems to have all the relevant information though...


----------



## pgriz

Dang.  Now I'm gonna have to do some testing on my own.  I never questioned the dogma of 18% grey, and I usually get good exposures...   But then, I've not used the 18% grey card reading in a while.


----------



## KVRNut

I don't think that manual mode is over rated at all.  Like a previous replier, I use what ever mode works the best for the photographic situation I'm in and for the results I wish to obtain in the final print.  However there are times when conditions or the subject make any of the auto modes useless and it's good to know how to use a light meter when setting up your aperture and shutter speed.  It also helps you to know your equipment and what results you'll get.  This is especially true when you use a large format or view camera.  Those things don't have auto modes and are pure manual all the way.

It's all to easy now to go out and say take a picture of a rose and be satisfied with the result.  Ask yourself, is the color in the picture the same as the color of the real thing?  How about the textures?  Did you tell your camera what type of result you wanted or did your camera tell you what result you should be happy with?  It would be a shame if that recorded memory isn't the same as you remember it and a bigger shame that one relied on pre-programmed modes instead of getting the most you can out of an instument that can record moments in time that'll never be seen again.


----------



## xjoewhitex

Schwettylens said:


> It is about consistencies.  Using auto or semi auto, your exposure will be all over the place.


Agreed, the only time I ever shoot in manual is when im shooting photo sets where I need all the photos to look the same. Theres no way I would be able to get 100 shots to be consistent if I shot in Programed.


----------



## table1349

I grabbed one of these a while back to give it a try.  So far I have been very pleased with the results.


----------



## table1349

Dominantly said:


> gryphonslair99 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dominantly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Rocket science it is not.
> 
> Middle gray, 18% reflectance, nanoo nanoo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Houston, whe have a problem.
> 
> Meters Don't See 18% Gray by Thom Hogan
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Don't know if I buy it.
Click to expand...



Just curious, why is this (Exposure Program = manual control (1)) a predominant theme in the exif data for the photos of your first linked post in you sig?  Wouldn't AV or TV worked just as well?


----------



## Dominantly

gryphonslair99 said:


> Dominantly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gryphonslair99 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Houston, whe have a problem.
> 
> Meters Don't See 18% Gray by Thom Hogan
> 
> 
> 
> Don't know if I buy it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Just curious, why is this (Exposure Program = manual control (1)) a predominant theme in the exif data for the photos of your first linked post in you sig?  Wouldn't AV or TV worked just as well?
Click to expand...

Sure wouldn't.


----------



## table1349

Dominantly said:


> gryphonslair99 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dominantly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't know if I buy it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just curious, why is this (Exposure Program = manual control (1)) a predominant theme in the exif data for the photos of your first linked post in you sig?  Wouldn't AV or TV worked just as well?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sure wouldn't.
Click to expand...


Must not be over rated then huh? :mrgreen:


----------



## Dominantly

Not sure where you are going with this.

I'm a manual guy, so I shoot manual. I find it easier, that's why my exif data shows it was shot in manual. You'll also notice it was center weighted metering, which would be more interesting to nail if using an automatic mode.


----------



## table1349

Dominantly said:


> Not sure where you are going with this.
> 
> I'm a manual guy, so I shoot manual. I find it easier, that's why my exif data shows it was shot in manual. You'll also notice it was center weighted metering, which would be more interesting to nail if using an automatic mode.



So am I when the situation calls for it, which is a good portion of the time.  Just using the work from someone else to make the point that there is a place for manual mode as well as AV & TV.


----------



## kkamin

This is the dumbest thread ever.

I didn't read the five page of responses, so sorry if anyone else's response is similar.

-----------

If you want to be in full creative control of the capture process you will shoot in one of the manual modes. You are able to determine the depth of field, the sharpness (freezing of action) of the image and the iso (amount of potential noise).

This is photography school 101 (first 5 min of class of a 4 year course).

Imo, every pixel in you photograph needs to be controlled by the creator in some way.


----------



## table1349

kkamin said:


> This is the dumbest thread ever.
> 
> I didn't read the five page of responses, so sorry if anyone else's response is similar.
> 
> -----------
> 
> If you want to be in full creative control of the capture process you will shoot in one of the manual modes. You are able to determine the depth of field, the sharpness (freezing of action) of the image and the iso (amount of potential noise).
> 
> This is photography school 101 (first 5 min of class of a 4 year course).
> 
> Imo, every pixel in you photograph needs to be controlled by the creator in some way.



Ooohh, We should start a whole new thread because I personally find this to be the dumbest thread ever: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...n-made-lady-gaga-their-creative-director.html


----------



## usayit

kkamin said:


> in one of the manual modes.



Cool...  your camera has more than one manual mode? Most have only one where you set the aperture and shutter yourself.


----------



## manaheim

zing.


----------



## kkamin

usayit said:


> yes it's overrated....  it's all about exposure.   How you get to the exposure is irrelevant.



It is relevant. These are the ESSENTIAL, creative choices you make in image capture.

Exposure is composed of four variables:

1. f/stop (size of the len's opening)
2. shutter speed (duration sensor is exposed to light)
3. ISO (sensors sensitivity to light--signal is amplified at higher ISOs)
4. The actual exposure. Where do you want your camera's dynamic range to actually record in the scene? There is no "correct" exposure.

Most people know f/stop controls depth of field (how much is in focus), shutter speed controls sharpness/blur of image, ISO determines noise control, and where you want your exposure to hit in a scene will dramatically effect the data collected.

I can take an identical picture of a scene with the same exposure, but have one image with a deep depth of field and everything in sharp focus and another with a shallow depth of field and have an abstract looking blur to parts of the image. 

If all you shoot is in automatic mode, you are leaving many of your creative choices arbitrarily up to your camera.

--------

My camera does have more than one manual mode: 'Shutter Priority', 'Aperature Priority' and 'Program'--you are manually selecting one of the variables that you find most important. The other modes on the dial are part of the Automatic mode family: The landscape symbol, portrait symbol, etc.


----------



## manaheim

I love watching new people "educate" people like usayit. Cracks me up. Especially when they also totally miss the joke. Absolute vintage.

Hey, usayit... thank god he took the time. I'm sure you didn't know anything about that stuff, right?  You know, like that facy wang-dangled technooooogy "a-per-ture"?  Wow.  You should read you one o' dem fancy books on pho-to-gra-phy!!!!


----------



## usayit

Hey Manaheim...  (I always liked your "directness")

LOL .. simply.. LOL

Welcome to the Photographic school of Sponge Bob Square Pants.

.....

kkamin,  I think when people refer to "manual mode" in this thread, I believe they are referring to the "M" found on many camera's mode dial only.   The mode in which both aperture and shutter are manually set by the user.  The members here all refer to Av, Tv, P as "automatic" or "semi-automatic" modes.   The "automatic" modes you refer to as "portrait", "landscape", etc.. are usually referred to as "creative" modes (or whatever marketing terms are used).   I was pulling your chain (knowing that there was a miscommunication in terminology).  Knowing that... we are on the same page...  It doesn't matter if you use M, Av, Tv, or even P.   All that matters is the exposure.     

Thanks for explaining but I think I have the basics pretty well understood.   My camera doesn't even have Shutter priority or Program modes much less "creative" modes.


----------



## kkamin

Sorry I missed the joke.

What is funnier to me is that a site like I-Aspect has a mission statement 'Where the art of photography comes first." but absolutely no one gets it. Look at any of the critique threads and it is 99% feedback regarding technical aspects of the photograph or just opinions--'ha love the shot' 'the white balance is off' 'cool' 'what f/stop did you shoot at?', ad infinim. What's sad is when someone actually posts an image with some depth and is seeking a critique and gets a reply like 'it's moody.'


----------



## usayit

I should start yet another photo forum with the mission statement...

"Screw Art and Tech.  Let's just have fun."


For me, I found that a good feedback (I refuse to say "critique") is only obtainable in a one on one interaction; preferably over a nice cold beer.   Its such a subjective (sometimes emotional) thing and once you place it in the cold and distant internet, the focus is distracted.


I rarely post for C&C....  I usually just post photos up just for fun.   There's another forum I post photos more frequently simply becuase its less active and the active members really just wanna have fun.


----------



## manaheim

kkamin said:


> Sorry I missed the joke.
> 
> What is funnier to me is that a site like I-Aspect has a mission statement 'Where the art of photography comes first." but absolutely no one gets it. Look at any of the critique threads and it is 99% feedback regarding technical aspects of the photograph or just opinions--'ha love the shot' 'the white balance is off' 'cool' 'what f/stop did you shoot at?', ad infinim. What's sad is when someone actually posts an image with some depth and is seeking a critique and gets a reply like 'it's moody.'


 
Nice deflection!

You know what I find even funnier is your pants!  I mean, seriously... who wears those things and expects to be taken seriously?!

Seem a silly retort?  I agree.  Please review yours.


----------



## jake337

Isn't manual pretty much neccesary in flash photography, especially off camera, to get lighting ratios where you want them?


----------



## Village Idiot

jake337 said:


> Isn't manual pretty much neccesary in flash photography, especially off camera, to get lighting ratios where you want them?


 
Unless you're shooting with TTL strobes, then yes.


----------



## Overread

Village Idiot said:


> jake337 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Isn't manual pretty much neccesary in flash photography, especially off camera, to get lighting ratios where you want them?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unless you're shooting with TTL strobes, then yes.
Click to expand...


I would also add that its unless you're using TTL strobes/flashes and also only using that light for fill light rather than a main light source. Once you move to having flash/strobe light as the main lighting source in a scene you'll most often also want to push select settings in the camera for the shot that the meter won't let you shoot (because it can't read the additional light you're going to add).



manaheim said:


> kkamin said:
> 
> 
> 
> a site like I-Aspect
Click to expand...


Oi! Mana that reminds me - get over there now you've been listed as AWOL...



ps - kkamin - seriously you make a big thing about the manual control over the camera and the technical side of the shot - and then make a very poor attempt to jab at another member of the site by focusing some form of ridicule on people in another community talking about the technical side of photography. 
At least if you're going to make this kind of low class insult at least try to remain on one train of thought in the same thread


----------



## Village Idiot

Overread said:


> Village Idiot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jake337 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Isn't manual pretty much neccesary in flash photography, especially off camera, to get lighting ratios where you want them?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unless you're shooting with TTL strobes, then yes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I would also add that its unless you're using TTL strobes/flashes and also only using that light for fill light rather than a main light source. Once you move to having flash/strobe light as the main lighting source in a scene you'll most often also want to push select settings in the camera for the shot that the meter won't let you shoot (because it can't read the additional light you're going to add).
Click to expand...

 
EV adjustments and such can take care of that. It's completely possible, but not something I'd recommend. They only time I could think that it was extremely useful is if you were in an evironment where shutter speed needed to remain constant, but your aperture could change. AV would be practically useless imho, because your shutter speed wouldn't constantly be changing the ambient exposure.


----------



## benhasajeep

I think the big question is, when to use manual mode!  I basically use most of the mode on the camera.  Deppends on what I am taking a picture of.  And how I want the output to be.  
For example if I am doing HDR, I automatically go to manual, or sunsets or sunrises I go to manual.  As I know the meter no matter what mode I am in.  Will not meter for what I want to show.  For normal shots you will find me in aperature priority most of the time.  With some time in shutter priority.  I even get lazy and use program.  It all deppends on what I am doing.

As for using Manual all the time?  That's not for me.  Sometime's I just want to point and shoot.


----------



## kkamin

usayit said:


> I should start yet another photo forum with the mission statement...
> 
> "Screw Art and Tech.  Let's just have fun."
> 
> 
> For me, I found that a good feedback (I refuse to say "critique") is only obtainable in a one on one interaction; preferably over a nice cold beer.   Its such a subjective (sometimes emotional) thing and once you place it in the cold and distant internet, the focus is distracted.
> 
> 
> I rarely post for C&C....  I usually just post photos up just for fun.   There's another forum I post photos more frequently simply becuase its less active and the active members really just wanna have fun.



Critiques don't have to be these blunt, tough love talks. Critique doesn't mean *criticize* as in being negative. But rather *'a critical analysis of one's work'*--a thoughtful examination. I'm sure most of us do it with movies. But we all know some people who leave a theater and have absolutely nothing to say about the film besides 'I liked it' or 'I didn't like it'. There is nothing wrong with that, but some people do enjoy discussing the movie.  They are essentially critiquing the film.

If I say, "I liked the colors of the film" or "I liked the CGI fight with the dragon" that's half a step away from a critique statement. The next step is to ask yourself is *why?* do you think that. Did the color's support the moods of the scenes? Did they use colors as symbolism? Why did it work? Where didn't it work? ...Did the battle scene with the dragon create a turning point in the story? Did it reveal aspects of the character through the fight? Or was it simply entertaining and well placed in the film's structure?

Most of the feedback I see on people's work is half a step away from a critique. They just need the *why?* answered, and that will give the creator a better understanding of why the viewer thinks the way they do. It's not easy to talk about photography in this way, but it astounds me that it is almost non-existent on the multiple forums I have checked out.


----------



## kkamin

Overread said:


> ps - kkamin - seriously you make a big thing about the manual control over the camera and the technical side of the shot - and then make a very poor attempt to jab at another member of the site by focusing some form of ridicule on people in another community talking about the technical side of photography.
> At least if you're going to make this kind of low class insult at least try to remain on one train of thought in the same thread



They are two separate ideas relating to two separate topics. Sorry if that confuses you.


----------



## Oogle

Just my chime in... I woul much rather use Manual than TV or AV or anything like that! I Wouldn't have gotten some of my best shots enless I had used manual.


----------



## skieur

I use whatever mode will give me the settings I want to take the picture, which means that I get around to all of them.

skieur


----------



## thatfornoobs

For me, it is quite literally as you said. I'm a control freak.


----------



## aprock83

I just like that you can control how the picture is taken 100%. I always shoot  in manual cuz most of the time you can predict how the picture will look way before you click the shutter. Thats just my opinion tho.


----------



## jake337

kkamin said:


> usayit said:
> 
> 
> 
> I should start yet another photo forum with the mission statement...
> 
> "Screw Art and Tech. Let's just have fun."
> 
> 
> For me, I found that a good feedback (I refuse to say "critique") is only obtainable in a one on one interaction; preferably over a nice cold beer. Its such a subjective (sometimes emotional) thing and once you place it in the cold and distant internet, the focus is distracted.
> 
> 
> I rarely post for C&C.... I usually just post photos up just for fun. There's another forum I post photos more frequently simply becuase its less active and the active members really just wanna have fun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Critiques don't have to be these blunt, tough love talks. Critique doesn't mean *criticize* as in being negative. But rather *'a critical analysis of one's work'*--a thoughtful examination. I'm sure most of us do it with movies. But we all know some people who leave a theater and have absolutely nothing to say about the film besides 'I liked it' or 'I didn't like it'. There is nothing wrong with that, but some people do enjoy discussing the movie. They are essentially critiquing the film.
> 
> If I say, "I liked the colors of the film" or "I liked the CGI fight with the dragon" that's half a step away from a critique statement. The next step is to ask yourself is *why?* do you think that. Did the color's support the moods of the scenes? Did they use colors as symbolism? Why did it work? Where didn't it work? ...Did the battle scene with the dragon create a turning point in the story? Did it reveal aspects of the character through the fight? Or was it simply entertaining and well placed in the film's structure?
> 
> Most of the feedback I see on people's work is half a step away from a critique. They just need the *why?* answered, and that will give the creator a better understanding of why the viewer thinks the way they do. It's not easy to talk about photography in this way, but it astounds me that it is almost non-existent on the multiple forums I have checked out.
Click to expand...

 
www.openphotographyforums.com


----------



## Ccauceg

I would say it depends. If im working hard on some kind of shoot and I want things to be exactly what I want then I shoot manual, as its easier to predict the highlights and shadows. If im just snap shooting then I go into "A" mode. Once you figure out manual and are pretty solid at predicting exposure you will find yourself shooting in it all the time.


----------



## kkamin

Ccauceg said:


> I would say it depends. If im working hard on some kind of shoot and I want things to be exactly what I want then I shoot manual, as its easier to predict the highlights and shadows. If im just snap shooting then I go into "A" mode. Once you figure out manual and are pretty solid at predicting exposure you will find yourself shooting in it all the time.



It's not really predicting or guessing. Your DSLR has a built in light meter visible in the viewfinder that is active in manual mode. On my Canon, it's that bottom horizontal meter that reads something like 
' -2     -1     0     +1     +2  ' 

You just line up the marker with zero and that is exactly what auto mode would calculate. It doesn't mean the exposure is correct, especially in complicated lighting scenarios. That is when people use incident light meters, gray cards, exposure compensation, feverish chimping and/or analyzing their histogram.


----------



## MichiganFarts

"Google it!"  

"Use the Search Function!" 

"OMG, this topic again?  We're beating a dead horse!" 

 "This subject has been rehashed so many times, there's no reason to dig into it again!"

*TPF just died...there is no need to make a new thread ever again.*


----------



## Conner41

To teach you to not be so dependent, you learn the skill of photography


----------



## dxqcanada

MichiganFarts said:


> "OMG, this topic again?  We're beating a dead horse!"
> 
> "This subject has been rehashed so many times, there's no reason to dig into it again!"



... because the original post was not turned into a sticky, so we have to keep bringing it back up !!

:lmao:


----------



## Infidel

MichiganFarts said:


> "Google it!"
> 
> "Use the Search Function!"
> 
> "OMG, this topic again?  We're beating a dead horse!"
> 
> "This subject has been rehashed so many times, there's no reason to dig into it again!"
> 
> *TPF just died...there is no need to make a new thread ever again.*



New to internet forums, eh?


----------



## mcooper

I shoot manual because I prefer to make all the decisions regarding my exposures instead of leaving everything (or almost everything) up to the camera.

Knowing how to shoot manually gives the photographer the most control over their photography, plain and simple. I know this may sound a bit 'old school', but it's really true. Doesn't mean one has to shoot in manual mode all the time, but I believe it's advantageous to know how for that very reason.


----------



## ghache

I shoot alot in Aperture but if i am shooting models, kids, weddings, even with no flash, i use my light meeter and set my camera accordingly. All depends on the location, Sun direction and what i am shooting. Its gives you alot of move flexibilty shooting manual.


----------



## Forkie

I use manual because I'm still learning.  I'm pretty much at the point now where I know what F/stop and ISO to be at to get the shot I want in whatever light.  I think if i'd always used Aperture Priority , I wouldn't know my camera as well as I think I do.


----------



## cnutco

usayit said:


> yes it's overrated....  it's all about exposure.   How you get to the exposure is irrelevant.
> 
> With that said I am in manual mode quite often simply because it works for me... next aperture priority.


 
+1

I use Manual as much as I can.  In most sporting events I shoot, I use Aperture Priority.  Just makes thing easier for me...


----------



## chito beach

Unless shooting @10 FPS I tend to always shot in manual mode with my A55.  With the live view and EVF there is not reason not to since you can see what the end result will be.


----------



## PhotoPoser

Exactly right.  There are times when the conditions and requirements allow you shoot in various auto settings.  But there is no way that you can get by without using manual much of the time.


----------



## MichiganFarts

Ever since I gained access to all the latest Photoshop programs, I don't even care about getting exact exposure, much less what mode I shoot in.


----------



## Garbz

Manual serves two purposes. 1) To take over when your camera really gives up and can't figure out how to expose your picture (typical when doing very low key, very high key, or working with flashes), and 2) provide for those people who flat out refuse to use the tools that are provided to improve their life. 

Unfortunately a lot of the latter exists and it's summed up by quotes like:


PhotoPoser said:


> But there is no way that you can get by without using manual much of the time.



Dear PhotoPoser there is definitely a way you can get by without using manual much of the time, in fact most if not all of the time. If you think you're not in control just because you're shooting A, S or even P then maybe you should re-read your camera manual.


----------



## quiddity




----------



## Dmitri

Personally, I never take my camera out of macro mode.


----------



## dxqcanada

I prefer "running stick figure" mode.


----------



## Dmitri

dxqcanada said:


> I prefer "running stick figure" mode.



I've been dying to try that one. But I haven't been lucky enough to see any running stick figures.


----------



## Josh66

Dmitri said:


> dxqcanada said:
> 
> 
> 
> I prefer "running stick figure" mode.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've been dying to try that one. But I haven't been lucky enough to see any running stick figures.
Click to expand...

 Dude - you have to draw it first.  How did you think animation was done?  ...That's why it's running.


----------



## Dmitri

oh my god, that explains it!! For years I've been looking for running stick figures, never realized I had to draw them. Thanks man!


----------



## pgriz

Are we the slaves of our tools, or are they means for us to achieve liberation?  Knowledge determines one or the other.  If you understand what a specific tool does, and its limits, then by all means use it and liberate yourself from pendantic obsession over details (which is what I think Garbz is referring to).  If you don't know, then you're a slave.  That includes the manual mode as well, I'm afraid.


----------



## dxqcanada

I think you have been reading about world news lately.


----------



## mortovismo

Yes. Whats the point in constantly insisting shooting in M when you're going to edit the s**t out of it in PS anyway?


----------



## photocist

manual mode isnt overrated when your camera doesnt have auto mode, or (like my case) all the lenses are old school and dont meter.


----------



## chito beach

mortovismo said:


> Yes. Whats the point in constantly insisting shooting in M when you're going to edit the s**t out of it in PS anyway?



that is why you shoot in manual mode and actually learn photography so you dont have to edit the crap out of them in PS. 

 I have posted quite a few that are directly out of camera except resize and crop


----------



## prodigy2k7

Garbz said:


> Manual serves two purposes. 1) To take over when your camera really gives up and can't figure out how to expose your picture (typical when doing very low key, very high key, or working with flashes), and 2) provide for those people who flat out refuse to use the tools that are provided to improve their life.
> 
> Unfortunately a lot of the latter exists and it's summed up by quotes like:
> 
> 
> PhotoPoser said:
> 
> 
> 
> But there is no way that you can get by without using manual much of the time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dear PhotoPoser there is definitely a way you can get by without using manual much of the time, in fact most if not all of the time. If you think you're not in control just because you're shooting A, S or even P then maybe you should re-read your camera manual.
Click to expand...

 I can't agree with you more!


----------



## molested_cow

I shoot in A mode primarily, but switch to M when doing long exposure, or B when doing really long exposures. When I need to do bracketing, I do it manually. The same goes when I use filters and need to step up or down.

If you are trying to take shots with high contrast in lighting, such as the sunset or the moon, you will definitely need to make manual adjustments.


----------



## Mike_E

Sometimes I like my burgers from McDonald's, sometimes I like to grill them myself.

Usually what you get out of life is what you put into it.


----------



## ericANDamanda

It's almost EXACTLY like the difference between the people who drive Automatic or Manual transmission cars.  The person who drives manual tends to want to have control over every aspect of the car, engine speed, gear, throttle, etc.  That same person will find driving an automatic boring, mundane, too easy and or unskillful.  The person driving the automatic will not see the need to drive a manual when there's a much easier option.  Both have their advantages and disadvantages but the person shooting manual will more likely than not be a very skilled photographer willing to take risks and accept responsibility for their mistakes when they don't get the setting quite right.  Where as the person shooting in the automatic modes will be more prone to blame their equipment and not their skill-set. 

God Bless, 

Eric & Amanda Photography - International Destination Wedding Photography Team - International Destination Wedding Photographers


----------



## o hey tyler

I shoot in "Bulb" mode exclusively and just guess on how long I need to hold down my shutter for. It's a pretty awesome system that has no insurance of consistency. :thumbup:


----------



## Dmitri

ericANDamanda said:


> It's almost EXACTLY like the difference between the people who drive Automatic or Manual transmission cars.  The person who drives manual tends to want to have control over every aspect of the car, engine speed, gear, throttle, etc.  That same person will find driving an automatic boring, mundane, too easy and or unskillful.  The person driving the automatic will not see the need to drive a manual when there's a much easier option.  Both have their advantages and disadvantages but the person shooting manual will more likely than not be a very skilled photographer willing to take risks and accept responsibility for their mistakes when they don't get the setting quite right.  Where as the person shooting in the automatic modes will be more prone to blame their equipment and not their skill-set.


 
It's not really like that at all...


----------



## dxqcanada

Yeah, I have seen many a Manual Tran driver that can't drive very well ... they just think they can.


----------



## table1349

Dmitri said:


> ericANDamanda said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's almost EXACTLY like the difference between the people who drive Automatic or Manual transmission cars.  The person who drives manual tends to want to have control over every aspect of the car, engine speed, gear, throttle, etc.  That same person will find driving an automatic boring, mundane, too easy and or unskillful.  The person driving the automatic will not see the need to drive a manual when there's a much easier option.  Both have their advantages and disadvantages but the person shooting manual will more likely than not be a very skilled photographer willing to take risks and accept responsibility for their mistakes when they don't get the setting quite right.  Where as the person shooting in the automatic modes will be more prone to blame their equipment and not their skill-set.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's not really like that at all...
Click to expand...

 :thumbup:

An appropriate automotive correlation would be that of a person that knows that an automobile is propelled via an internal combustion engine and a person that can repair an internal combustion engine as well as a drive train, brakes, etc.  

They are both fine to ride with, but when a mechanical problem arises the driver calls for help to get the car to a shop.  The mechanic can find, understand and fix the problem because the mechanic doesn't just have a knowledge base of how to operate the vehicle.  Their knowledge base includes the intricacies of how the vehicle operates.


----------



## Robin Usagani

Heel and toe all night long.  Don't use the NAWZzzzzz too early!


----------



## rmpbklyn

I don't like manual mode on digital camera, but then again  I don't understand the camera operation options I suppose.  There are too many options , beyond shutter speed and aperture.
I had a easier time with manual film camera for some reason. But for printing, I can't go back to film camera, it's too expensive to print.


----------



## PASM

If auto gave me the exposure every time, i wouldn't need manual...but it don't.


----------



## chito beach

PASM said:


> If auto gave me the exposure every time, i wouldn't need manual...but it don't.



very seldom does it give you the correct exposure. auto is always a compromise over quality


----------



## dxqcanada

chito beach said:


> PASM said:
> 
> 
> 
> If auto gave me the exposure every time, i wouldn't need manual...but it don't.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> very seldom does it give you the correct exposure. auto is always a compromise over quality
Click to expand...

 
I don't agree.
There are many times where I have shot in manual and auto ... and encountered that auto was what I thought the manual exposure should be.
The Matrix metering algorithms are getting smarter.

Not all shots require manual intervention ... I am actually tired of hearing that you cannot take the best shot with the camera in control.


----------



## usayit

speaking of manual transmissions, I cant find a single truck built today equipped with one... wtf?


----------



## MichiganFarts

Fixing it all in photoshop gives me more control than manual mode ever could.


----------



## chito beach

MichiganFarts said:


> Fixing it all in photoshop gives me more control than manual mode ever could.



shows how little you actually know and understand.  PS can not ever bring out detail lost on a poor shot, it can only work with the information given


----------



## dxqcanada

chito beach said:


> PASM said:
> 
> 
> 
> If auto gave me the exposure every time, i wouldn't need manual...but it don't.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> very seldom does it give you the correct exposure. auto is always a compromise over quality
Click to expand...

 
Chito, I have to say that you have posted some good shots that were taken in Aperture Priority (based on your EXIF data).


----------



## Overread

dxqcanada said:


> chito beach said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PASM said:
> 
> 
> 
> If auto gave me the exposure every time, i wouldn't need manual...but it don't.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> very seldom does it give you the correct exposure. auto is always a compromise over quality
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't agree.
> There are many times where I have shot in manual and auto ... and encountered that auto was what I thought the manual exposure should be.
> The Matrix metering algorithms are getting smarter.
> 
> Not all shots require manual intervention ... I am actually tired of hearing that you cannot take the best shot with the camera in control.
Click to expand...

 
You realise the meter in auto is the very same meter used for manual mode - with the difference that in manual mode you have the option to change how the meter itself reads the scene (as you also get in the priority modes). All auto is doing is setting your aperture, shutter speed and ISO for you based on what the meter reads and on the criteria that the camera designers have put into place for auto mode to take into account.

It sounds more like you don't fully understand how aperture and shutter speed apply to the appearance of your photos and that as a result you find yourself in situations where auto is giving you a look that you prefer, but that you don't fully understand which parts (aperture value and shutter speed primarily) are contributing to the look of the photo. This is partly an understanding of theory and also partly a real world experience factor - the more you shoot the better you get at predicting what the look will be with certain settings in a given scene.


----------



## dxqcanada

Yes I do understand.
The light meter is the same, the calculation of the exposure using a combination of shutter speed and aperture may or may not be different than the one that I calculated in my head.

Hmm, actually I do understand about Aperture, Shutter Speed, light sensitivity of the medium, exposure latitude ... and their affect on the image ... so my statement is not totally uneducated.

All I am saying is that these new cameras have come a long way from the Center Weight metered cameras of old.

Ah, but isn't the image that I prefer not the best one ... even if it is shot in Auto Exposure ??


----------



## PASM

I agree..The more i used levels,curves the more it shows the necessity to get the best exposure possible. like you already say..the data's got to be there. The idea that it's ok to shoot sloppy in RAW isn't good.



chito beach said:


> MichiganFarts said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fixing it all in photoshop gives me more control than manual mode ever could.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> shows how little you actually know and understand.  PS can not ever bring out detail lost on a poor shot, it can only work with the information given
Click to expand...


----------



## Overread

dxqcanada said:


> All I am saying is that these new cameras have come a long way from the Center Weight metered cameras of old.
> 
> Ah, but isn't the image that I prefer not the best one ... even if it is shot in Auto Exposure ??


 
Aye indeed those points are true and the camera automatic controls are indeed far more advanced than they were before and in many situations green auto mode can deliver what a person needs in a photo. 

However when someone turns to me and says that auto mode is often giving them better results (ie shots that they want) than regular modes (full manual; aperture priority; shutter priority) then I come to think that its not so much that auto mode has gotten better, but that the person still isn't quite sure how to control the camera itself = or at least not quite able to both predict what the shot will look like based on the settings and also make up their own mind about how to creatively expose the scene before them (this last part leading them to favour a 3rd party input over their own experiments - in this case that of the choice of auto mode)


----------



## Overread

PASM said:


> I agree..The more i used levels,curves the more it shows the necessity to get the best exposure possible. Just as you say..the data's got to be there. The idea that it's ok to shoot sloppy in RAW isn't helpful.
> 
> 
> 
> chito beach said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MichiganFarts said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fixing it all in photoshop gives me more control than manual mode ever could.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> shows how little you actually know and understand.  PS can not ever bring out detail lost on a poor shot, it can only work with the information given
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

 
I think Michigan left out the sarcastic font in that post


----------



## table1349

usayit said:


> speaking of manual transmissions, I cant find a single truck built today equipped with one... wtf?



No offense there usayit, but..................... Well Duh.... you live in New Jersey.  :lmao:

Come to Kansas.  We may not have much in the way of excitement or night life compared to New Jersey, but we got's lots of auto dealers with manual transmission trucks on their lots. :mrgreen:


----------



## o hey tyler

Overread said:


> PASM said:
> 
> 
> 
> I agree..The more i used levels,curves the more it shows the necessity to get the best exposure possible. Just as you say..the data's got to be there. The idea that it's ok to shoot sloppy in RAW isn't helpful.
> 
> 
> 
> chito beach said:
> 
> 
> 
> shows how little you actually know and understand.  PS can not ever bring out detail lost on a poor shot, it can only work with the information given
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think Michigan left out the sarcastic font in that post
Click to expand...

 
This is the sarcastic font. Good ol' comic sans in large type face.


----------



## table1349

o hey tyler said:


> Overread said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PASM said:
> 
> 
> 
> I agree..The more i used levels,curves the more it shows the necessity to get the best exposure possible. Just as you say..the data's got to be there. The idea that it's ok to shoot sloppy in RAW isn't helpful.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think Michigan left out the sarcastic font in that post
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is the sarcastic font. Good ol' comic sans in large type face.
Click to expand...


----------



## o hey tyler

You sir, have clearly not used Comic Sans enough. The font you displayed is not a web safe font, therefore cannot be used to spread sarcasm like good ol' MS Comic Sans in a large type.


----------



## MichiganFarts

chito beach said:


> MichiganFarts said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fixing it all in photoshop gives me more control than manual mode ever could.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> shows how little you actually know and understand.  PS can not ever bring out detail lost on a poor shot, it can only work with the information given
Click to expand...

 
You just got outed for using auto modes, while you're foolishly preaching manual mode man...I think my take on photoshop, sarcastic or not, is the least of your concerns.  You're basically, a hoax!


----------



## dxqcanada

Overread said:


> dxqcanada said:
> 
> 
> 
> All I am saying is that these new cameras have come a long way from the Center Weight metered cameras of old.
> 
> Ah, but isn't the image that I prefer not the best one ... even if it is shot in Auto Exposure ??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aye indeed those points are true and the camera automatic controls are indeed far more advanced than they were before and in many situations green auto mode can deliver what a person needs in a photo.
> 
> However when someone turns to me and says that auto mode is often giving them better results (ie shots that they want) than regular modes (full manual; aperture priority; shutter priority) then I come to think that its not so much that auto mode has gotten better, but that the person still isn't quite sure how to control the camera itself = or at least not quite able to both predict what the shot will look like based on the settings and also make up their own mind about how to creatively expose the scene before them (this last part leading them to favour a 3rd party input over their own experiments - in this case that of the choice of auto mode)
Click to expand...


Ah, now I realize where you are coming from.
Ok, I was just told (by my wife) that what I wrote was not what I meant to say ... it appears I have lost the capability of explaining in written form.


----------



## chito beach

Overread said:


> dxqcanada said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> chito beach said:
> 
> 
> 
> very seldom does it give you the correct exposure. auto is always a compromise over quality
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't agree.
> There are many times where I have shot in manual and auto ... and encountered that auto was what I thought the manual exposure should be.
> The Matrix metering algorithms are getting smarter.
> 
> Not all shots require manual intervention ... I am actually tired of hearing that you cannot take the best shot with the camera in control.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You realise the meter in auto is the very same meter used for manual mode - with the difference that in manual mode you have the option to change how the meter itself reads the scene (as you also get in the priority modes). All auto is doing is setting your aperture, shutter speed and ISO for you based on what the meter reads and on the criteria that the camera designers have put into place for auto mode to take into account.
> 
> It sounds more like you don't fully understand how aperture and shutter speed apply to the appearance of your photos and that as a result you find yourself in situations where auto is giving you a look that you prefer, but that you don't fully understand which parts (aperture value and shutter speed primarily) are contributing to the look of the photo. This is partly an understanding of theory and also partly a real world experience factor - the more you shoot the better you get at predicting what the look will be with certain settings in a given scene.
Click to expand...


I understand and dont rely on the in camera metering but from experience of setting in manual and a separate meter


----------



## chito beach

MichiganFarts said:


> chito beach said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MichiganFarts said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fixing it all in photoshop gives me more control than manual mode ever could.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> shows how little you actually know and understand.  PS can not ever bring out detail lost on a poor shot, it can only work with the information given
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You just got outed for using auto modes, while you're foolishly preaching manual mode man...I think my take on photoshop, sarcastic or not, is the least of your concerns.  You're basically, a hoax!
Click to expand...


What ever that gibberish was meant to say. I shoot manual nearly all the time except for when I shoot at 10 shots per second which does not allow for any manual input, that is not used often


----------



## Dmitri

usayit said:


> speaking of manual transmissions, I cant find a single truck built today equipped with one... wtf?


 
Toyota Tacoma, baby!!


----------



## Dmitri

o hey tyler said:


> You sir, have clearly not used Comic Sans enough. The font you displayed is not a web safe font, therefore cannot be used to spread sarcasm like good ol' MS Comic Sans in a large type.



It's also nice and BBBIIGGGG!


----------



## MichiganFarts

chito beach said:


> MichiganFarts said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> chito beach said:
> 
> 
> 
> shows how little you actually know and understand.  PS can not ever bring out detail lost on a poor shot, it can only work with the information given
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You just got outed for using auto modes, while you're foolishly preaching manual mode man...I think my take on photoshop, sarcastic or not, is the least of your concerns.  You're basically, a hoax!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What ever that gibberish was meant to say. I shoot manual nearly all the time except for when I shoot at 10 shots per second which does not allow for any manual input, that is not used often
Click to expand...


Certainly I was a bit extreme.  I'm just being the opposite extreme of some here.  Now that you know how silly it sounds...


----------



## chito beach

MichiganFarts said:


> chito beach said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MichiganFarts said:
> 
> 
> 
> You just got outed for using auto modes, while you're foolishly preaching manual mode man...I think my take on photoshop, sarcastic or not, is the least of your concerns.  You're basically, a hoax!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What ever that gibberish was meant to say. I shoot manual nearly all the time except for when I shoot at 10 shots per second which does not allow for any manual input, that is not used often
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Certainly I was a bit extreme.  I'm just being the opposite extreme of some here.  Now that you know how silly it sounds...
Click to expand...


unfortunately what you said about let auto run your life and fix it later is not silly that is how many do it in the first place. I just thought you where serious


----------



## RacePhoto

No Manual isn't over rated. Neither is AV, TV, or P

They are tools and each has it's useful application. Just like some who have mentioned AE lock or AF lock, it depends.

Might as well add, Canon or Nikon, they are both just fine and there are others. Just that the top two offer the best complete systems with ease of availability, consistent quality, and hold value.


----------



## VIPPhotog

I make my money shooting with strobes in a controlled environment.  I want all my pictures to come out consistently well exposed, so I check my light meter, set my camera and leave it for the rest of my shoot.   It's boring, but it's how I make $$$.   It also saves me from adjusting a bunch of images later.   When I'm shooting for fun, then I use other settings.


----------



## manaheim

I prefer to rip the engine out of my car before driving.  I also have cut the power off at my house and removed the heating system.  Real men burn cats.

Viva la revolution!


----------



## MichiganFarts

manaheim said:


> I prefer to rip the engine out of my car before driving.  I also have cut the power off at my house and removed the heating system.  Real men burn cats.
> 
> Viva la revolution!


 
And you seemed more the type to rip your warp core out of your starship.


----------



## manaheim

Warp cores are over-rated.  I use paddles... mainly to load the cats into the firebox.


----------



## Garbz




----------



## table1349

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm    http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...-photo-gallery/237585-help-me-understand.html


----------



## Dan Barron

I always use manual mode when shooting landscapes as I have more time to faff about with all settings and be precise about what I want. However when shooting people or moving subjects I will usually stick my D90 into Aperture mode and adjust let the camera do the bulk of the work.


----------

