# How I transitioned to mostly manual, and why/when I use it



## fjrabon (Nov 5, 2012)

There's been a lot of talk around here lately about what modes you shoot in, especially as it applies to manual shooting.  I think some of the comments betray a misunderstanding of how the modes work, when the modes are most useful, and how to best take advantage of these modes.  Here, I'll mostly be talking about how I transitioned to shooting in manual, when I use it, and how I shoot in manual.  From what I've seen on TPF, there's a lot of talk about shooting in manual, but I can't recall seeing anybody go about their process for doing it.  Perhaps this might be useful to somebody who is intrigued by shooting in manual, but just hasn't made the leap yet.  Other modes will also be discussed, especially when I'd use them, but this is mostly a discussion on how I shoot manual.

Manual can be very daunting for the person who just got their first dSLR.  P,A (Av for Canon) and S (Tv for Canon) all just spit out relatively well exposed photos that look pretty, to say nothing of the scene modes that most consumer grade cameras include as well.  The first time anybody sort of ventures into that 'M' water, they usually drown in a sea of wildly inaccurate exposures. Those other modes make such pretty pictures, and you can just focus on composition.  Why even venture into these scary manual seas, I'm not a pro anyway?  That's how I think most people feel.  

I know I felt this way for a long time.  Well, by long time I guess I mean maybe 5 months after I got my first dSLR (actually nearly a year ago to the day, I got my D3100).  I probably used green auto for a day or two, just to see what the thing could do.  Then I found this website, and started using aperture priority (A mode) for nearly all my shooting.  Aperture priority is quite an amazing thing, especially in modern Nikon cameras with matrix metering.  For how much some of the 'pros' on here boo hoo it, these cameras are pretty freaking intelligent.  The vast, vast majority of the time, it'll get you a good exposure.  It also allows you to control your depth of field easily too, so you can get those creamy, bokeh filled backgrounds, which are the hallmark of somebody trying to get more 'professional looking' results, but not quite being there yet.  And A mode, in my mind, will always have its place in my arsenal.  Heck, Joe McNally uses A mode a _*LOT *_of the time, and if it's good enough for Joe, it's good enough for just about anybody.  

After I started testing out the waters of A mode, I slowly started venturing into the world of exposure compensation.  Essentially exposure compensation simply takes the exposure value that the camera thinks is right, and adds some brightness or darkness (via slower or faster shutter speed when you're in A mode), as you tell it.  So, let's say I'm in A mode, and I take a shot, and I think "hey, that's a bit brighter than I think it should be."  Well, just dial in a little bit of negative exposure compensation and bam, you're controlling things a bit more.  

However, I sort of began to notice a few things about my A mode shooting.  First, using A mode with exposure compensation can be sort of annoying in certain conditions.  SO lets say I'm taking a photo of a group of friends.  Let's say that I dialed the perfect settings in for them using exposure compensation.  Snap it, great.  Next, another friend, wearing all white jumps into the photo.  It's fairly bright daylight and the guy is wearing all white.  This is going to confuse the camera's brain (because, after all, who would wear all white?), and it's going to cause the camera to throw your exposure off, as it tries to tone down that bright white.  It might fight through and recognize faces (these things are smart) and hang on to the proper exposure for the faces, but it might not.  And this is just one example, there are all sorts of scenarios where the camera gets fooled into changing your exposures, when you didn't want them changed.  It's somewhat possible to work around this, but it's kind of a pain, and unreliable anyway.  A second thing I noticed about A mode was that it was shaping how I viewed exposure.  Because I had gotten so used to shooting in it, I sorta began to subconsciously think things _should_ look that way.  What I mean is that shooting in A mode made me start thinking like the camera.  And I was producing a lot of good, but not great shots.  Everything looked quite okay, but nothing stood out.  Because in order to stand out, you can't do what everybody else is doing.  And that's what A mode does.  It makes your exposures look like what everybody else's exposures look like.  Also, about this point in time I started working in a studio, where your lights aren't TTL, and thus you are FORCED to go manual.  

It's very easy to get comfortable with A mode.  It's especially easy, because when you first start with manual, your shots will usually look *worse* than they did when you were shooting in A mode.  You feel like you're taking a step backwards, not making some great leap forwards.  And often times you'll sorta just say "well, I was getting better shots in A, let's just go back to that for the moment, and learn M another day."  

Luckily for me, I was more or less forced into shooting M mode.  I had to learn it.  Granted, shooting manual in a studio with big lights is a different thing than shooting a fluid event in manual.  In a studio you're usually going to light meter.  But simply being forced into it at all really took a lot of the fear of it away.  

A related side-point here about camera bodies.  If you have one of the beginner cameras that just have one control wheel, really you probably should just stick to A mode.  Those cameras aren't really made to shoot manual.  Manual is a PITA if you have to hold down a little button to adjust shutter speed.  Really in those cases you might as well just use exposure compensation when you need to.  In order to effectively shoot manual, you need a dedicate wheel for both aperture and shutter speed.  As Zack Arias has said, he could absolutely do an editorial shoot with his son's T2i image quality wise, but he'd end up smashing it against the wall because of the single control wheel.  If you shoot manual, you should have a body with dual control wheels.  So, my job forcing manual on me, and getting my D7000 with dual command wheels were really the two things that paved the way for me to shoot manually effectively.  And I don't mean any of this to belittle models like the D3100, D5100T1i or T2i.  They're fantastic cameras, really.  I took what are still some of my favorite photographs with my humble little D3100.  And really, there's nothing wrong with shooting in A mode, you occasionally have to work a bit harder, and you have to make a conscious effort to not let the camera dictate how you shoot, but it can be done.  Especially if you're not shooting professionally and crunched for time, and thus can fiddle with things a bit more.  

Now, when I first started shooting in manual, I didn't actually think through the part I mentioned earlier about not letting the camera dictate how you shoot.  Because at first, when shooting on my own outside the studio, what I was doing was constantly just centering the in-camera light meter on matrix or center weighted metering.  A *huge number* of photographers shoot this way, that is in manual, but always centering the in camera light meter.  These photographers are also the ones who tend to belittle people who don't shoot in manual the most.  They are prone to statements like 'I'm not a hobbyist, I shoot in manual' or "if you want to be a serious photographer, shoot in manual'.  What they fail to understand is that when you always center the in camera light meter, you're shooting in A mode, you're just turning the dial for the camera, instead of letting it do the work.  If the difference between hobbyist and serious photographer is simply turning a knob, well, then that's no difference at all.  

So, if you can't just use your in camera light meter, then how the heck are you supposed to shoot in manual?  Do you have to have such good eyes that you can look at a scene and just *know* it needs ISO 200, f/8, SS 80?  THough some photographers can do that, that's not necessary at all.  What is necessary is knowing what your in camera light meter does, and how to use it.  First, I'm of the opinion that if you're going to shoot in manual, you need to shoot with your in camera light meter set to spot mode.  In spot mode your camera is essentially going to tell you how close whatever it is the little dot is pointing at is to middle grey.  Middle grey is exactly what it sounds like, the exact middle value in the camera's grey scale.  When a scene comes out to about an average of middle grey, it tends to be considered 'properly exposed'  Things are a bit more complicated than that, but that's all we need to know for now.  The second thing you need to know is what you want your exposure to look like.  Of all the things that go into shooting manual, this is the only one that's actually difficult.  Because it's an artistic decision.  If you just want a standard looking exposure, just shoot in A mode, or even P mode.  There is nothing wrong with that when a shot calls for a standard exposure.  You might have to give a touch of exposure compensation here and there.  But manual is what you need when you don't want a perfectly standard exposure.  When you want to *create* something with light.  Because while these modern dSLRs are great at many things, they aren't yet creative.  They can't look at a scene and decide that you want a single highlight of the person's face, with quick fall off and dramatic shadows everywhere else.  It can't see that you want a dark and ominous sky and silhouettes.  It has no idea that you want to shoot an edgy high key portrait with one single spot of dark that is a pool player holding an 8 ball.  The in camera light meters have gotten more intelligent, especially in matrix mode, but at the end of the day, they are all about producing normal looking shots.  

So, back on point, you gotta know what you want your picture to look like.  Then, with practice, it helps if you roughly know what that would correspond to in the light meter.  ie, you don't need to be able to see the exact values that it would take to achieve it, but you do need to know what you want in your frame to be middle gray.  Then use your in camera spot meter.  Sometimes you may not want anything to be middle grey, and then you need to know what rough values you want them to be on the in camera light meter.  

Essentially, you have to think of the light meter as a tool that tells you how close whatever it is pointed at is to middle grey.  And then you have to be able to get your exposure to where you want those various parts in relation to middle grey, based on your artistic vision.  Fiddling with the buttons to get yourself there is the easy part, though that's perhaps what seems daunting to people starting off.  Knowing where you want the exposure is the hard part, the part that makes you a photographer instead of just a snapshooter.  

basically to give you guys an idea of what I'm talking about here, I'll post a shot I just took a few minutes ago, expressly for this purpose:




DSC_4068 (1) by franklinrabon, on Flickr

edit: D7000; 35mm f/1.8g; raw; converted to B&W in aperture (crop and conversion were only edits); f/1.8; ISO 160; 1/30 shutter

Here, there were basically three zones of light: 1) the background, which was ambiently lit; 2) the left side of my dog's face, which was lit by light reflected off my front porch floor, then through a window (porch is covered, and it's overcast, so this is essentially sunlight, thrice diffused, by clouds, by a white porch floor and by a dirty window) and the right side of my dog's face, which is lit by a Metz AF-50 speedlight, through a 24" hotshoe speed box.  

Essentially my thoughts were this: First I wanted to shoot at f/1.8 for the DoF.  I wanted the tip of her nose OOF, because I really wanted to push the viewer to her eyes.  She has some white whiskers on her chin, and had they been in focus, the viewer would be a bit more drawn to them, being the lightest thing in the picture.  Shooting a black dog is tough, because naturally the eye is drawn to light things, so you have to work a bit harder to get the viewers eyes where you want them.  Next, I wanted to get the background to middle grey (the back wall is actually a dark red), I wanted just enough of the speed light to hit the wall to give it fall off towards the edges, almost a subtle vignette, but created with flash. I wanted a few highlights on the right side of her face, and I wanted the soft diffuse ambient to light her left side.  I didn't want the light to be so even and flat to be boring.  I wanted the contrast of varying levels of contrast.  So, how do I go about this?  first, I pointed the in camera light meter at the edge of the background and centered that for middle grey, then I checked the left side of her face to see if that would still get her at an acceptable level. To make the background pure middle grey, my dog would be a touch darker than I wanted, so I slowed my shutter speed just a tad bit.  I guessed that this would mean I needed the flash at about 1/64.  That was pretty much right, and I just left it there.  The sppedlight softbox is at about a 45 degree angle, elevated about 2 feet above her head and about 2 feet back.  

Essentially I started with my DoF.  Set that where I wanted.  Then I started figuring what shutter speed to get the ambient levels where I wanted them using the in camera light meter (remember, shutter speed doesn't do anything to flash).  Then I figured out what level I wanted on my flash, by looking at the levels my correct ambient exposure gave me on the side that was going to be flashed.  Then hit the shutter.  

I'm not saying any of this is better or worse than anything else, that's just how I do it.  And since I rarely see anything like that written around here, just thought I'd share with some new shooters, or even intermediate shooters my approach.  Feel free to take whatever you'd like and discard whatever you'd like.


----------



## fjrabon (Nov 5, 2012)

dang, that was a rambling mess.  hopefully somebody finds it useful.


----------



## ronlane (Nov 5, 2012)

Thanks for posting this. I read it and it helped me to see the process in my head better. I switched to manual because of this site and thinking that I just HAVE to shoot in manual only. I have since been reading a book and seeing the benefits of the AV and SV modes and how they can really compliment my work and help me to better understand how to manual better.


----------



## ghache (Nov 5, 2012)

*burp*


----------



## runnah (Nov 5, 2012)

If you don't shoot in manual you are terrible photographer, person, and probably lover.


----------



## fjrabon (Nov 5, 2012)

Graystar said:


> fjrabon said:
> 
> 
> > dang, that was a rambling mess.  hopefully somebody finds it useful.
> ...



Where did I say manual is better?  Of course it isn't in all situations.  It's simply different, and has different strengths and weaknesses.  This expressly isn't about how to shoot in the other modes.  I could easily write about how to do that too, and I shot in A mode A LOT and I use exposure lock a lot.  You just have this huge chip on your shoulder about people who use manual, to the point of it almost being worse than people who belittle others for using different modes.  Just because some people find manual easier to use in some situations, doesn't mean a whole lot.  You also don't use flash very often do you?  Notice that the example I gave used flash?  Of course that's the biggest time you're going to use manual.  But guess what, using manual effectively with flash is one of the biggest ways you can improve your photography.  BUt in order to do that, you first have to understand manual.  Those awesome strobes are going to be useless unless you understand manual, and how to control ambient with it first.  

Sure, with mixed cloud cover I'd probably not use manual.  I never said that.  I EXPRESSLY SAID that A mode would always be a major part of my arsenal.  Either you didn't read what I wrote (which I understand, it was a lot) or you didn't understand it.  If you didn't read it, why comment?

Essentially what you're advocating is this: use P mode, then use your command wheel to take over aperture to set DoF like you want, then use the secondary dial to set exposure compensation how you want it, then use exposure lock to hold it there.  How is that easier than just shooting manual?  A, P and S are obviously easier when they're easier.  But if you're using exposures that are all different from a Nikon decided standard exposure, it's more effort than just doing it with manual.


----------



## The_Traveler (Nov 5, 2012)

runnah said:


> If you don't shoot in manual you are terrible photographer, person, and probably lover.



How about 2 out of 3?


----------



## Dao (Nov 5, 2012)

> I sort of began to notice a few things about my A mode shooting.  First,  using A mode with exposure compensation can be sort of annoying in  certain conditions.  SO lets say I'm taking a photo of a group of  friends.  Let's say that I dialed the perfect settings in for them using  exposure compensation.  Snap it, great.  Next, another friend, wearing  all white jumps into the photo.  It's fairly bright daylight and the guy  is wearing all white.  This is going to confuse the camera's brain  (because, after all, who would wear all white?), and it's going to cause  the camera to throw your exposure off, as it tries to tone down that  bright white.  It might fight through and recognize faces (these things  are smart) and hang on to the proper exposure for the faces, but it  might not.  And this is just one example, there are all sorts of  scenarios where the camera gets fooled into changing your exposures,  when you didn't want them changed.



I believe that has nothing to do with shooting mode.   Av, TV or manual mode will face the same issue.


----------



## ghache (Nov 5, 2012)

somebody just learned how to shoot manual and think he discovered something totally awesome. 

NOT.

i shoot in all mode. they are not on you're camera just because somebody at nikon or canon though some photographer might be a bit more lazy. no, there is a reasons they added each modes and they have a purpose and a situation for each of them.


----------



## pixmedic (Nov 5, 2012)

hey! cute doggie! love those eyes!


----------



## fjrabon (Nov 5, 2012)

Dao said:


> > I sort of began to notice a few things about my A mode shooting.  First,  using A mode with exposure compensation can be sort of annoying in  certain conditions.  SO lets say I'm taking a photo of a group of  friends.  Let's say that I dialed the perfect settings in for them using  exposure compensation.  Snap it, great.  Next, another friend, wearing  all white jumps into the photo.  It's fairly bright daylight and the guy  is wearing all white.  This is going to confuse the camera's brain  (because, after all, who would wear all white?), and it's going to cause  the camera to throw your exposure off, as it tries to tone down that  bright white.  It might fight through and recognize faces (these things  are smart) and hang on to the proper exposure for the faces, but it  might not.  And this is just one example, there are all sorts of  scenarios where the camera gets fooled into changing your exposures,  when you didn't want them changed.
> 
> 
> 
> I believe that has nothing to do with shooting mode.   Av, TV or manual mode will face the same issue.



Yeah, hence why I said when I first started shooting manual I was still in the same rut.  But I do think it's easy to get in a rut with it in A, P or S modes, simply because you have the camera basically asking you "are you sure you want to expose it that way?  In all my Nikon encoded genius, I think that's not right, just leave that EC alone big guy."  Sure, as I said, you can use EC and it's basically the same thing.  But if you're constantly using EC, you're essentially using a less stable version of manual anyway.  Some people like to shoot that way (Joe McNally does a lot, though he will also shoot in manual a lot when A mode and TTL gets finicky), some people like to shoot manual.  One's not necessarily better or worse, although I will argue that some are more efficient than others in certain situations.  

The whole point wasn't to advocate manual, but simply explain what my process is for shooting manual, how I approach shots with it, and a bit about when I think it works better.  I certainly agree the flat out 'manual is always better and more professional' mindset is a plague, and many of the people who have that mindset don't even use manual correctly anyway.


----------



## fjrabon (Nov 5, 2012)

I guess I should have bolded the parts where I said several times that the other modes all have their uses, and that I use all of them (except the scene modes) because the anti-manual crowd sure did ignore those parts, lol.


----------



## runnah (Nov 5, 2012)

The_Traveler said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> > If you don't shoot in manual you are terrible photographer, person, and probably lover.
> ...



Have you tried switching to manual? I did and not only did my performance improve, I also lost 10lbs, and found $5.


----------



## pixmedic (Nov 5, 2012)

really folks? he never said manual was the end-all-be-all for photography, although there are plenty here that constantly preach that. 
it was just a lengthy explanation of the process by which HE decides when and how to shoot manual, and when and how to use the other modes. 
I think it was a great post for people who are not yet comfortable shooting manual, or think that they HAVE to shoot manual if they want to get out of "auto" mode.


----------



## fjrabon (Nov 5, 2012)

Graystar said:


> fjrabon said:
> 
> 
> > Where did I say manual is better?
> ...



Jesus F'ing christ.  I don't bash auto modes, I said AT LEAST THREE DIFFERENT TIMES they are useful.  I use them just about every day.  Every single time I go out and shoot a day time football game I use A mode.  Heck, most all of my day time outdoors shooting without strobes I use A mode.  I use exposure lock.

you said: "I set exposure with one press of a button"

No, you don't set exposure in one press of a button in any of the auto modes _*UNLESS YOU ARE USING THE VALUE IT GIVES YOU*_ ie the standard Nikon exposure.  If you're deviating from that exposure, you're using one button press *and a dial turn*.  And if you decide to change your aperture at all, for a different depth of field, you're now using two dial turns and a button press.  And if you want to lock the exposure, you're now using a button press, two dial turns and another button press.  And sure, sometimes you want the standard Nikon exposure.  If you do, by all means, don't use manual.  I wouldn't in that sort of scenario.  But if you're deviating very much from what the camera thinks is right, you're fiddling with two dials and a lock button.  In manual you're only fiddling with two dials.  

Finally, as I said, manual is a MUST if you're using strobes.  And I find it easier when using multiple speedlights, as TTL I've always found too finicky.  But, like I said, This was mostly to try to explain how I go about using manual, because you have to understand it generally, to use it with flash.


----------



## HughGuessWho (Nov 5, 2012)

My Gawd. Some people just like to argue just for the sake of argument. The OP's post was a good one. You don't have to agree with every statement made, but it certainly isn't worthy of a bashing.
OP, thanks for contributing.


----------



## fjrabon (Nov 5, 2012)

Perhaps I should lay out when I *personally* use manual, and when I use other modes as well.

Manual is my tool of choice when lighting is constant.  If I'm shooting a night football game, I'll shoot manual, because what this allows me to do is have manual set for the field, and the one of the auto modes set to what I'll use if I want to quickly shoot the sidelines.  For a night time football game, I know that the field is going to be lit the same the whole time if the sun has gone down, I can set it once and forget it.  Then, I can also set A mode so that I can shoot the cheerleaders or crowd at moments as well.  If you stick to one mode, this big difference in light between the field and the sidelines is hard for the camera to handle.  For the sidlines I'll usually go A mode AND auto ISO, with the ISO max set at 3200.  WHen lighting is constant, you can go manual and forget it, you don't have to worry about exposure lock, you just set your exposure one time and shoot nearly the whole game with that.  Your pictures have the same look to them and tell a more coherent story.  The auto modes, with stadium lights in a night game, are going to jump all over the place in the auto modes, as any sports shooter can tell you.  One frame will look a full stop over exposed, the next a full stop underexposed.  It's like the camera is searching for a problem to fix that isn't there sometimes.  

Manual is also the ONLY tool when you're using strobes.  Strobes can't do TTL, and the 3 stops of EC the auto modes give you aren't enough to deal with strobes.  When you have a mix of ambient and strobes, well, that's why you're a photographer and not a snapshooter.  Because you gotta understand a lot of stuff to get ambient plus strobes to work in harmony.  But when they do, it's quite the beautiful thing.  

Daytime outdoors without strobes, I use A mode.  Set my DoF how I want, take a shot, dial in EC as necessary.  The constantly changing nature of natural light makes manual cumbersome.  

Street, I default to P mode, then switch over to manual if I have the time and want to be a bit more creative.  Street a lot of times you don't have the opportunity to even set your aperture without missing the moment.  A shot that captures the moment with a bit more DoF than you wanted is better than a shot that missed the moment with perfect DoF.  I also default to auto ISO with the limit being 3200 and a min shutter speed of 1/60 (I'm usually shooting street with a 35mm lens on a crop frame).  

Landscape I tend to use manual.  Subject's not going anywhere, I can really hone in on exactly the settings I want for the exact exposure I want.  Technically this breaks my daytime A mode rule, but landscape is different than generalized daytime outdoors shooting.  

Outdoor portraits.  Typically Im using speedlights, A mode and TTL.  It can get a little complicated, as you're dialing flash and exposure compensation all over the place, but you're dealing with changing ambient, which means that A mode and TTL are a big help.  Sometimes Ill set certain flashes to manual, others to TTL.  Outdoor portraits are tricky to do right, gotta know how to use the tools.  

Indoor portraits with speedlights.  I personally tend to use manual on both the camera and flashes.  You can go the A mode and TTL route.  SOme people like it, I personally prefer double manual, because I understand flash better that way, but that's just me personally.  It's not really more or less efficient.

Again, not saying any of these are right or wrong, that's just how I do them and my reasons for each.  Take it all for what you want.  Again, I'm simply writing this, because I never see how, when or why to shoot in the various modes on here.  Just pointless arguments on which mode is 'better' or what % of the time you use each.


----------



## unpopular (Nov 5, 2012)

Auto is fine. Manual is fine. But you're not going to see any improvement in either unless you understand exposure.

The only reason why Greystar and Derrel, or myself and Jake337 get good results using whatever exposure mode we prefer is because we understand exposure and camera control. The rest is just process and preference. But manual exposure alone doesn't make you a better photographer and auto exposure doesn't make your pictures any better.


----------



## JAC526 (Nov 5, 2012)

The_Traveler said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> > If you don't shoot in manual you are terrible photographer, person, and probably lover.
> ...



I bet I can guess which one you want.


----------



## fjrabon (Nov 5, 2012)

unpopular said:


> Auto is fine. Manual is fine. But you're not going to see any improvement in either unless you understand exposure.
> 
> The only reason why Greystar and Derrel, or myself and Jake337 get good results using whatever exposure mode we prefer is because we understand exposure and camera control. The rest is just process and preference. But manual exposure alone doesn't make you a better photographer and auto exposure doesn't make your pictures any better.



I've never really understood why exposure, in and of itself, is difficult.  Especially if you're not using lights, and don't have to deal with how shutter speed differentially treats ambient v. flashed light.

What do people mean when they say 'understand exposure'?  I really don't get how any old idiot can't just get a properly exposed photo.  

Do people mean understand, artistically, what they want their exposure to be?   Because that can be hard.  But that doesn't seem to be what people mean by 'understanding exposure,' when they talk about it here.

how is it not just as simple as:

ISO - higher values make the picture brighter, lower values darker
Aperture - bigger numbers (putting aside the whole fraction v. whole number debate for a second) mean darker, lower numbers mean brighter
shutter - shorter shutters mean darker, longer shutters mean brighter

After that, you only need to understand the concept of a stop, which is pretty easy (though perhaps f/stops take a bit of memorizing, but are still relatively straight forward if you just remember the main ones, ie 1.4 -> 2 -> 2.8 -> 4 -> 5.6 -> 8 -> 11)

Flash complicates things a little bit, but when people here talk about 'understanding exposure' they are almost never talking about flash either.


----------



## fjrabon (Nov 5, 2012)

Graystar said:


> fjrabon said:
> 
> 
> > No, you don't set exposure in one press of a button in any of the auto modes _*UNLESS YOU ARE USING THE VALUE IT GIVES YOU*_ ie the standard Nikon exposure.  If you're deviating from that exposure, you're using one button press *and a dial turn*.  And if you decide to change your aperture at all, for a different depth of field, you're now using two dial turns and a button press.  And if you want to lock the exposure, you're now using a button press, two dial turns and another button press.
> ...



Yes, I realize you can turn AE lock on and off.  I have my main function button set to AE lock.  But if you want to use an auto mode, you turn it on and off, keeping it on all the time defeats the whole purpose of an auto mode.  My bigger point is that if you are doing anything outside of the standard exposure, you're moving two dials and pushing a button.  WHICH IS THE SAME THING AS MANUAL.  

You are just ridiculous with how defensive you are about something as silly as P mode.  P mode is fine, you love it.  we get that.  I never attacked it, you don't have to defend it.  I'm JUST EXPLAINING HOW I USE MANUAL.  ME PERSONALLY.  Jesus, can you get that through your thick skull?  As I outlined I use every single mode, though I don't use S mode very often.  

There is nothing to understand about exposure lock.  You press it, it locks, you press it, it unlocks, am I missing anything?  I use it a lot when I shoot in A mode.  It's a useful tool.  

I said that I use manual when I want to be more creative, because that is HOW I PERSONALLY SHOOT.  Not because you can't be creative in another mode.  It's because I personally can get the results that I want more efficiently, when I want non-camera decided exposures, using manual, as opposed to an auto mode + EC.  If you're more efficient a different way, FINE, BY ALL MEANS.  

This whole thing was just explaining how I do things the way I do things.  Because I rarely see anybody write posts like that.  I know I personally would be fascinated to see Derrel, or Tyler, or Robin, or MLeek or unpopular, or really anybody explain how they personally approach shooting various environments.


----------



## Dao (Nov 5, 2012)

fjrabon said:


> Dao said:
> 
> 
> > > I sort of began to notice a few things about my A mode shooting.  First,  using A mode with exposure compensation can be sort of annoying in  certain conditions.  SO lets say I'm taking a photo of a group of  friends.  Let's say that I dialed the perfect settings in for them using  exposure compensation.  Snap it, great.  Next, another friend, wearing  all white jumps into the photo.  It's fairly bright daylight and the guy  is wearing all white.  This is going to confuse the camera's brain  (because, after all, who would wear all white?), and it's going to cause  the camera to throw your exposure off, as it tries to tone down that  bright white.  It might fight through and recognize faces (these things  are smart) and hang on to the proper exposure for the faces, but it  might not.  And this is just one example, there are all sorts of  scenarios where the camera gets fooled into changing your exposures,  when you didn't want them changed.
> ...




I think I will do it differently.
I will spot meter an area (a person face, or arm, or grass or a gray shirt) where I believe will give me a good reading and exposure lock it.  Basically A mode with the desire aperture, point at the area with spot meter, exposure lock (with my thumb), focus and take the shot. 

However, if that white shirt guy keep coming and there are 20 plus shots need to take in the same scene, I may use manual setting at that time to save me some times (you can call me lazy).   If only one or 2 shots, spot meter with exposure lock works faster for me.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Nov 5, 2012)

For the most part, a lot it comes from when a person first started to learn about photography. For example I always shoot manual, I learned that way with film cameras, it's easy for me, and I am very comfortable shooting this way. I always end up with the results I am looking for.  If someone is comfortable shooting on auto and is satisfied with the results, that's good for them.  If anyone wants to use the portrait, sport, landscape, AV, TV, VCR, BVD, MICKEY MOUSE, whatever mode they think will work good for them, if they're happy with the results, who cares.  Discussions like this start to become pointless.

Personally I think it's a great idea to learn how to set a camera and shoot manual, but it's not for everyone.


----------



## Mach0 (Nov 5, 2012)

imagemaker46 said:
			
		

> For the most part, a lot it comes from when a person first started to learn about photography. For example I always shoot manual, I learned that way with film cameras, it's easy for me, and I am very comfortable shooting this way. I always end up with the results I am looking for.  If someone is comfortable shooting on auto and is satisfied with the results, that's good for them.  If anyone wants to use the portrait, sport, landscape, AV, TV, VCR, BVD, MICKEY MOUSE, whatever mode they think will work good for them, if they're happy with the results, who cares.  Discussions like this start to become pointless.
> 
> Personally I think it's a great idea to learn how to set a camera and shoot manual, but it's not for everyone.



+1


----------



## timor (Nov 5, 2012)

Unpopular is right. Fifties or now, exposure problem is the same and ways to solve it are the same. Just now folks got in their hands overcomplicated supercomputers to shoot pictures and is getting lost in the maze of possible settings. Computers are not doing anything extraordinary, they do same thing as a guy with a spot meter, they just do it much faster. Matrix metering isn't anything new, it's used by photographers for as long as spot meters exists and that's dialing in compensation for a given light condition. Matrix metering is also supposed to make up for simple and very effective incident light metering, something, what even the best dslr cannot do.
If most of the folks so avidly shooting digital would learn on cameras from 50-ties having only spot meter to establish theirs exposures, there would be not so many questions.


----------



## fjrabon (Nov 5, 2012)

Dao said:


> fjrabon said:
> 
> 
> > Dao said:
> ...




The white shirt was just a theoretical example.  The perhaps more common scenario is a flash aimed at the floor off a reflective surface.  For whatever reason, TTL/A mode has trouble with that sort of light, it'll jump like crazy with it.  However, to keep things simple I just introduced random guy with a white shirt, to just explain how a camera's computer can get fooled from time to time.


----------



## fjrabon (Nov 5, 2012)

imagemaker46 said:


> For the most part, a lot it comes from when a person first started to learn about photography. For example I always shoot manual, I learned that way with film cameras, it's easy for me, and I am very comfortable shooting this way. I always end up with the results I am looking for.  If someone is comfortable shooting on auto and is satisfied with the results, that's good for them.  If anyone wants to use the portrait, sport, landscape, AV, TV, VCR, BVD, MICKEY MOUSE, whatever mode they think will work good for them, if they're happy with the results, who cares.  Discussions like this start to become pointless.
> 
> Personally I think it's a great idea to learn how to set a camera and shoot manual, but it's not for everyone.



Yeah, unfortunately this turned into the one discussion I had no interest whatsoever, a debate on which mode is better.  I hate those threads.  I felt like I was going out of my way to mention that I use all of the modes, I don't think any of them make a person more or less of a photographer.  I just see a lot of people confused on how to shoot manual, what the thought process is with it, so I thought I'd just lay out how I do it, for whatever that may be worth.  

If you're fully convinced that P mode is the be all and end all, and that manual is completely pointless and for stuck up idiots, I don't see why such a person would have read this thread in the first place.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Nov 5, 2012)

fjrabon said:


> imagemaker46 said:
> 
> 
> > For the most part, a lot it comes from when a person first started to learn about photography. For example I always shoot manual, I learned that way with film cameras, it's easy for me, and I am very comfortable shooting this way. I always end up with the results I am looking for.  If someone is comfortable shooting on auto and is satisfied with the results, that's good for them.  If anyone wants to use the portrait, sport, landscape, AV, TV, VCR, BVD, MICKEY MOUSE, whatever mode they think will work good for them, if they're happy with the results, who cares.  Discussions like this start to become pointless.
> ...



People do get confused when it comes to shooting manual, after all there are so many settings that are required,  iso, f-stop, shutter speed.  It only takes one click of a dial to shoot on auto.  But like I said if people are happy with their results then it all doesn't matter how they get to that point.


----------



## unpopular (Nov 5, 2012)

fjrabon said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> > Auto is fine. Manual is fine. But you're not going to see any improvement in either unless you understand exposure.
> ...



Understanding the so-called exposure triangle is easy. It's just a ratio of three terms. Where exposure gets tricky is when you start metering, and what the meter is telling you relative to exposure. Is that skin tone going to be Zone V or Zone IV? Is that concrete Zone VI or Zone VII? How will this region be rendered if that region is placed into any given zone? The more you think about exposure control, the less the concept of "proper exposure" really makes sense.

I didn't read your OP, but I am curious - when you do manual exposure what meter mode are you using?


----------



## fjrabon (Nov 5, 2012)

Jesus Christ, I didn't mean P mode is silly as in it's a silly thing to use, I meant it's silly as in it's a silly thing to be obsessed with and defensive over.  It's a silly thing to try to defend.  It doesn't need defending.  Manual is equally silly as a concept to defend.  It's a tool.  Use it when it gets you best results.  

No, what I said was that if you want to use the benefit of the auto modes, you unlock it, so that it redecides how to expose.  All I was saying.  

Furthermore, Again, what I was saying is that I find it more efficient to use manual over a lot of exposure compensation/ aperture adjustments in P mode.  _*I*_ find it easier and more intuitive.  That's all I've ever been saying.  Outside of using strobes, I've never presented manual as anything as inherently better than any other mode.  I tend to use manual personally because I work with strobes a lot, and thus I've grown more comfortable with it, and it just works better for me, personally.  Again, I see a lot of people curious on here about manual, but they don't really know how to jump into it and try it out.  And yes, you do have to jump into it at some point if you want to use strobes.  and if you're going to go very far into various sorts of photography, you need to understand manual.  I was talking to a couple of shooters about why newer photographers get so frazzled with strobes, and we all sort of agreed it was because they felt uncomfortable with manual to begin with, and then adding strobes on top of that was what made it hard for them.  So, even if you love P mode, you need to understand manual, how to approach it (and I'm sure you do, because from what I gather you're a good shooter, again this thread wasn't directed at you, it's directed at people who feel lost as soon as they turn the dial over to M).

Sure, you find P mode easier and more intuitive, great.  Don't worry about what I have to say about manual.  I don't find anything wrong with shooting in P mode and using EC, program shift and exposure lock.  I PERSONALLY find it cumbersome, but that's probably because I use strobes a lot and don't think in terms of program shift and EC, I think in terms of shutter speed and aperture.  I can shoot in the other modes, sometimes more efficiently in certain situations.  I certainly don't think to be a pro you have to shoot in manual.  Like I said, my absolute favorite photographer, Joe McNally, shoots in A and TTL more often than not.


----------



## fjrabon (Nov 5, 2012)

unpopular said:


> fjrabon said:
> 
> 
> > unpopular said:
> ...



spot only for manual.  ie basically sort of 'mouse over' the metering spot, get a grasp on the dynamic range of the shot and figure out where I want my exposures to land, what I want to be at what point on the in camera light meter.  Or, I'll sometimes use a Sekonic light meter and think in terms of f/stops.


----------



## tomso (Nov 5, 2012)

When I first got my dSLR, I put it in manual because that's how I learn. I can change each setting, one at a time, and see the results. I make mental (and physical) notes, I adjust, I adapt. I have a T3i so by no means was shooting in full manual quick or easy. It was a huge PITA and I missed a LOT of shots. But because I'm learning, I'm OK with that. I don't miss as many shots anymore. My pictures are (slowly) improving. I'm getting better at "seeing" a scene and having a good estimate of where my technical settings should be before I shoot (unless I'm using flash, as that's my current learning objective).

That being said, that's just how I learn. I use Av when shooting action now, but otherwise generally leave the other modes on my camera alone. Not because I think there's anything wrong with them, but because I'm more comfortable in Av or M. As for people who feel they have to get on their high horse for which mode they shoot in, I don't see the point. It's like attacking someone for using a fork in a Chinese restaurant. Sometimes it's a lot harder to eat with chopsticks and the fork is just a better tool for the job. You aren't a terrible person because of that.


----------



## unpopular (Nov 5, 2012)

fjrabon said:


> spot only for manual. ie basically sort of 'mouse over' the metering spot, get a grasp on the dynamic range of the shot and figure out where I want my exposures to land, what I want to be at what point on the in camera light meter. Or, I'll sometimes use a Sekonic light meter and think in terms of f/stops.



Well, then yeah. You have a good grasp on it by the sounds of it. A lot of people just will shoot manual, but then just do everything the camera would do in auto/evaluative mode, just line up triangle and zeros, and feel like a big badass because they shoot "manual". I'd say 75% of people who shoot manual are just doing that.

The only thing you *might* be missing is the idea of zone placement. I'm sure you understand the idea that any region can be rendered as any zone, but you may not be fully implementing the concept into your process.


----------



## fjrabon (Nov 5, 2012)

timor said:


> Unpopular is right. Fifties or now, exposure problem is the same and ways to solve it are the same. Just now folks got in their hands overcomplicated supercomputers to shoot pictures and is getting lost in the maze of possible settings. Computers are not doing anything extraordinary, they do same thing as a guy with a spot meter, they just do it much faster. Matrix metering isn't anything new, it's used by photographers for as long as spot meters exists and that's dialing in compensation for a given light condition. Matrix metering is also supposed to make up for simple and very effective incident light metering, something, what even the best dslr cannot do.
> If most of the folks so avidly shooting digital would learn on cameras from 50-ties having only spot meter to establish theirs exposures, there would be not so many questions.



Nikon's evaluative matrix metering is a little bit more complicated than that.  It takes the image, compares it to data from a 30,000 image library, finds the most similar images using both color and brightness, and then tries to get the exposure on the scene of your picture as close to that as possible.


----------



## fjrabon (Nov 5, 2012)

unpopular said:


> fjrabon said:
> 
> 
> > spot only for manual. ie basically sort of 'mouse over' the metering spot, get a grasp on the dynamic range of the shot and figure out where I want my exposures to land, what I want to be at what point on the in camera light meter. Or, I'll sometimes use a Sekonic light meter and think in terms of f/stops.
> ...



I don't use zone terms very often in my head, but yeah, I use the concept of exposure zones.  I'll sometimes talk about exposure zones when trying to explain a concept of how I'd expose something or how I'd light it.  I sometimes struggle with exactly seeing if something is zone iV or V exactly, but that's sort of besides the point, I guess.  The big issue is understanding how you relatively want the zones to fall in your image, and how best to do that.  I'm sure as you've noticed, I tend to favor more contrast and thus the high and low zones, but that isn't anything to do with the zone method as much as artistic preference.  I tend to avoid zone IX a lot as a sort of stylistic preference, and go from VIII to X with black point.

edit: haha, just re-read that and realized I flipped the numbers.  I tend to avoid zone I and turn it into 0 with black point, haha.


----------



## o hey tyler (Nov 5, 2012)

Wow Graystar. WOW. 

Franklin, I liked your post and for a lot of new photographers looking into shooting manual, it should be quite useful. As for the combatants of your post, they're ridiculous. I didn't ever get the impression reading your post that you were somehow suggesting that manual mode was the "be all, end all" to photography.


----------



## pixmedic (Nov 5, 2012)

ay dios mio....yet another good informative post flushed totally down the drain by a bunch of technical photography geniuses that have to argue over what "is" is and how they did NOT have sex with that woman.


----------



## amolitor (Nov 5, 2012)

fjrabon, just let it go. Your post was fine, and Graystar now has his or herself emotionally invested in "winning" something or other which most of the rest of us can't even figure out what it is. Most of us have no trouble understanding what you mean, and don't care to try parsing out trivialities, and then deliberately misunderstanding them in order to argue about stuff.

You made some excellent remarks and contributed to the forum in a really useful way. Thanks! Well done! The pissing match that has arisen does not contribute in any useful way. Let it die!


----------



## fjrabon (Nov 5, 2012)

o hey tyler said:


> Wow Graystar. WOW.
> 
> Franklin, I liked your post and for a lot of new photographers looking into shooting manual, it should be quite useful. As for the combatants of your post, they're ridiculous. I didn't ever get the impression reading your post that you were somehow suggesting that manual mode was the "be all, end all" to photography.



haha, the funniest thing about the whole response is that I've been lambasted before for talking about how much I like and shoot in A mode.  And then I got criticized the other day for talking about how much I've been digging P mode for quick street shooting.


----------



## fjrabon (Nov 5, 2012)

amolitor said:


> fjrabon, just let it go. Your post was fine, and Graystar now has his or herself emotionally invested in "winning" something or other which most of the rest of us can't even figure out what it is. Most of us have no trouble understanding what you mean, and don't care to try parsing out trivialities, and then deliberately misunderstanding them in order to argue about stuff.
> 
> You made some excellent remarks and contributed to the forum in a really useful way. Thanks! Well done! The pissing match that has arisen does not contribute in any useful way. Let it die!




haha, thanks amolitor.  yeah, I guess I'm done with it, and I like Graystars posts a lot generally, and will continue to do so.  He knows his stuff, which is why I kept trying to engage him, because I do respect him as a shooter and a poster.


----------



## pixmedic (Nov 5, 2012)

if we give Graystar an extra 50 internet points, can he say he "won" and this can all just end?


----------



## o hey tyler (Nov 5, 2012)

pixmedic said:
			
		

> if we give Graystar an extra 50 internet points, can he say he "won" and this can all just end?



No?


----------



## table1349 (Nov 5, 2012)

Wow........

Here was my transition. 
1971 - bought a Nikon F2 and a couple of lenses.   Only one mode, want to guess which one it was? Learned how to use that thing inside and out and learned as many tricks of the trade as possible.  Kept that and a few other F2's in various configurations until I finally bought a DSLR. That when I learned about them other modes.  

Now I use what ever mode works the best for what I am doing.  


Oh, as far as learning to drive, well you city fellers may have learned all that start with the rules of the road, written test etc. etc. etc. crap.  Where I come from I was driving a car or a pickup sitting on my granddads lap at 8 or 9. Driving tractors at 10 as well as driving the pickup around on the farm.  At 12 I was sitting in the drivers seat with my granddad sitting next to me driving on country roads and into town.  By the time I was 14 and could get my restricted permit I had been driving for 7 or 8 years.  I was learning the rules of the road as I was learning to drive.  At 14 all I had to do to get my restricted permit was show that I knew the rules of the road and at 16 I was free to drive any where, any time.


----------



## unpopular (Nov 5, 2012)

fjrabon said:


> I'm sure as you've noticed, I tend to favor more contrast and thus the high and low zones, but that isn't anything to do with the zone method as much as artistic preference.  I tend to avoid zone IX a lot as a sort of stylistic preference, and go from VIII to X with black point.



Well, it kind of is. If you want high contrast, you're not going to place the upper hilights down at zone VII or the shadows up at zone III. The zone system is all about previsualization, and determining how the image will be processed at time of exposure, rather than just kind of guestimating or assuming a one-size fits all. It's really a method of tying exposure and processing into a "contiguous photography". So when thinking about the zone system, processing shouldn't be an unfortunate inconvenience, but rather a part of photography as vital as exposure itself.

With the zone system in film, you meter the shadows and the hilights and adjust exposure and development time accordingly in a way such that the shadows would be placed in the desired zone by exposure, and hilights placed in the desired zone by development. If the metered placement of the hilights relative to the shadows were too far apart to cause clipping, you'd cut development time, too close to cause flatness you'd extend development time. Ideally in a precise, determined way according to the development time/dmax curve.

Part of the problem with digital is that there is no consensus of how metering should be undertaken. It used to be for negatives, you'd expose for the shadows. This was because it was felt that the hilights could retain more detail by building up density, and in the case of b/w film, you could always pull density by adjusting development time. With color slide film the opposite was true, with no density in the finished slide in the hilights, it was better to meter the hilights and let the shadows build up. But when digital came along there was this kind of lacuna surrounding how to meter. People just kind of ignore the problem.

I believe that this is a major issue, actually. How do you meter in digital? Using a greycard works, but even here there are limitations beyond the obvious. When I first started tackling the issue I knew about ETTR and figured to meter for the shadows and pull the hilights. That worked fine until i actually got out there and started thinking "but if pushing a "little to the right is good, why not push more to the right". The arbitrariness also bothered me. How much do I ETTR? +0.3EV? +1.0EV? Then i started thinking "well, if I'm pushing the hilights right up to latitude, why not just meter for the hilights the way I did with slides?". And that's where I am now. Meter for the hilights, and let the shadows fall wherever they end up. If I want lots of contrast, just make them darker; I can always throw any shadows I don't want. If I want lower contrast, just leave the shadows closer to how they were. In any case, I know that my raw file will contain the maximum dynamic range I can get or want to get as sometimes it's useful to clip the hilights.

As great as that was, I never felt it had the unification that the zone system offered. Still processing digital files felt like a separate task from exposure. I did develop a way to accurately adjust shadows according and relative to the exposure, and I have dubbed it the "Unified System" and is based very substantially from the Zone System. In practice, however, because digital is has instant feedback, it's really too cumbersome to use. But it does work and works very similarly to Adams' Zone System.


----------



## o hey tyler (Nov 5, 2012)

Graystar said:


> The problem is posts like the OP tend to convince the poor beginners (remember...this was posted in the beginners' forum) that they NEED to learn manual mode.



There isn't a problem with a post like this. You're the problem.


----------



## unpopular (Nov 5, 2012)

Graystar said:


> The problem is posts like the OP tend to convince the poor beginners (remember...this was posted in the beginners' forum) that they NEED to learn manual mode, that they won't get good results until they learn manual mode, and that once they do learn manual mode, their photography will instantly be better.  All of those points are 100% incorrect.
> 
> When you learn to drive, you first learn the rules of the road, take a written test, and THEN get a learner's permit that allows you to actually go out on the road to practice what you've learned.  What beginners need is to learn first is how to control light.  Sending them into manual mode (or any mode really) without understanding light is like putting a driving student behind the wheel without knowing the rules of the road.  It's going to be a disaster.  Beginners need to learn how a meter works, why a meter gets fooled, and how functions of visual perception, such as Color Constancy, affect our view of the world.  Only then can the camera become a real tool for producing exactly what you want.
> 
> As I said...it's knowledge that gets you the results you want.  It has nothing to do with exposure modes.  THAT's what's wrong with these posts that make a big deal of exposure modes.



I disagree 150%. You _*can't *_fully understand auto mode without understanding how it works and what it's doing. You can think of AE in theoretical terms, but you'll never fully appreciate what is happening unless you've actually DONE IT yourself.

For the last 30 years photography has been taught on this principle, and I firmly believe it is taught this way for a sound reason.


----------



## table1349 (Nov 5, 2012)

Now now folks, We all know that experience doesn't mean near as much as book learning.  
Why where would we be if Eli Whitney hadn't gone to college to get a...oops sorry, he didn't finish college and get that law degree before he invented the Cotton Gin.

But there were the Wright Brother, the first men ever to fly and spawned an entirly new mode of travel.  Why where could they have gotten with out those degree's.....What, they never graduated high school you say.  Well surely just building bicycles and tinkering with gliders couldn't have given them the mechanical skills to build an aeroplane. Yep that was they way it was spelled back then.  

I had another 100 names to toss out, but danged if not a one of them had a whole lot of book learning.  Sorry there folks.   FYI Check out # 7 on the list.  Who would have ever thunk it? 



*1. *Abraham Lincoln,  lawyer, U.S. president. Finished one year of formal schooling,  self-taught himself trigonometry, and read Blackstone on his own to  become a lawyer. 
 

*2.* Amadeo Peter Giannini, multimillionaire founder of Bank of America. Dropped out of high school. 
 

*3. *Andrew Carnegie, industrialist and philanthropist, and one of the first mega-billionaires in the US. Elementary school dropout. 
 

*4. *Andrew Jackson,  U.S. president, general, attorney, judge, congressman. Home-schooled.  Became a practicing attorney by the age of 35  without a formal  education. 
 

*5. *Andrew Perlman, co-founder of GreatPoint.  Dropped out of Washington University to start Cignal Global  Communications, an Internet communications company, when he was only 19. 
 

*6. *Anne Beiler, multimillionaire co-founder of Auntie Annes Pretzels. Dropped out of high school. 
 

*7. *Ansel Adams, world-famous photographer. Dropped out of high school. 
 

*8. *Ashley Qualls, founder of Whateverlife.com,  left high school at the age of 15 to devote herself to building her  website business. She was more than a million dollars by 17. 
 

*9. *Barbara Lynch, chef, owner of a group of restaurants, worth over $10 million, in Boston. Dropped out of high school. 
 

*10. *Barry Diller,  billionaire, Hollywood mogul, Internet maven, founder of Fox  Broadcasting Company, chairman of IAC/InterActive Corp (owner of Ask.com), 
 

*11. *Ben Kaufman, 21-year-old serial entrepreneur, founder of Kluster. Dropped out of college in his freshman year. 
 

*12.* Benjamin Franklin, inventor, scientist, author, entrepreneur. Primarily home-schooled. 
 

*13.* Billy Joe (Red) McCombs, billionaire, founder of Clear Channel media, real estate investor. Dropped out of law school to sell cars in 1950. 
 

*14.* Bob Proctor,  motivational speaker, bestselling author, and co-founder of Life Success  Publishing. Attended two months of high school. 
 

*15.* Bram Cohen, BitTorrent developer. Attended State University of New York at Buffalo for a year. 
 

*16. *Carl Lindner, billionaire investor, founder of United Dairy Farmers. Dropped out of high school at the age of 14. 
 

*17. *Charles Culpeper, owner and CEO of Coca Cola. Dropped out of high school. 
 

*18.* Christopher Columbus, explorer, discoverer of new lands. Primarily home-schooled. 
 

*19.* Coco Chanel, founder of fashion brand Chanel. A perfume bearing her name, Chanel No. 5 kept her name famous. 
 

*20. *Colonel Harlan Sanders, founder of Kentucky Fried Chicken (KFC). Dropped out of elementary school, later earned law degree by correspondence. 
 

*21.* Craig McCaw, billionaire founder of McCaw Cellular. Did not complete college. 
 

*22. *Dave Thomas, billionaire founder of Wendys. Dropped out of high school at 15. 
 

*23. *David Geffen, billionaire founder of Geffen Records and co-founder of DreamWorks. Dropped out of college after completing one year. 
 

*24. *David Green, billionaire founder of Hobby Lobby. Started the Hobby Lobby chain with only $600. High school graduate. 
 

*25. *David Karp, founder of Tumblr. Dropped out of school at 15, then homeschooled. Did not attend college. 
 

*26. *David Neeleman, founder of JetBlue airlines. Dropped out of college after three years. 
 

*27. *David Ogilvy, advertising executive and copywriter . Was expelled from Oxford University at the age of 20. 
 

*28. *David Oreck, multimillionaire founder of The Oreck Corporation. Quit college to enlist in the Army Air Corps. 
 

*29. *Debbi Fields, founder of Mrs. Fields Chocolate Chippery. Later renamed, franchised, then sold Mrs. Field's Cookies. 
 

*30. *DeWitt Wallace, founder and publisher of Readers Digest. Dropped out of college after one year. Went back, then dropped out again after the second year. 
 

*31 .*Dov Charney, founder of American Apparel. Started the company in high school, and never attended college. 
 

*32.* Dustin Moskovitz, multi-millionaire co-founder of Facebook. Harvard dropout. 
 

*33. *Frank Lloyd Wright, the most influential architect of the twentieth century. Never attended high school. 
 

*34. *Frederick "Freddy" Laker, billionaire airline entrepreneur. High school dropout. 
 

*35. *Frederick Henry Royce, auto designer, multimillionaire co-founder of Rolls-Royce. Dropped out of elementary school. 
 

*36 .*George Eastman, multimillionaire inventor, Kodak founder. Dropped out of high school. 
 

*37.* George Naddaff, founder of UFood Grill and Boston Chicken. Did not attend college. 
 

*38. *Gurbaksh Chahal, multimillionaire founder of BlueLithium and Click Again. Dropped out at 16, when he founded Click Again. 
 

*39. *H. Wayne Huizenga,  founder of WMX garbage company, helped build Blockbuster video chain.  Joined the Army out of high school, and later went to college only to  drop out during his first year. 
 

*40. *Henry Ford, billionaire founder of Ford Motor Company. Did not attend college. 
 

*41. *Henry J. Kaiser, multimillionaire & founder of Kaiser Aluminum. Dropped out of high school. 
 

*42. *Hyman Golden, co-founder of Snapple. Dropped out of high school. 
 

*43.* Ingvar Kamprad, founder of IKEA, one of the richest people in the world, dyslexic. 
 

*44. *Isaac Merrit Singer, sewing machine inventor, founder of Singer. Elementary school dropout. 
 

*45. *Jack Crawford Taylor, founder of Enterprise Rent-a-Car. Dropped out of college to become a WWII fighter pilot in the Navy. 
 

*46. *Jake Nickell, co-founder and CEO of Threadless.com. Did not graduate from college. 
 

*47. *James Cameron, Oscar-winning director, screenwriter, and producer. Dropped out of college. 
 

*48. *Jay Van Andel, billionaire co-founder of Amway. Never attended college. 
 

*49. *Jeffrey Kalmikoff, co-founder and chief creative officer of Threadless.com. Did not graduate from college. 
 

*50. *Jerry Yang, co-founder of Yahoo! Dropped out of PhD program. 
 

*51. *Jimmy Dean, multimillionaire founder of Jimmy Dean Foods. Dropped out of high school at 16. 
 

*52.Â * John D. Rockefeller Sr.,  billionaire founder of Standard Oil. Dropped out of high school just  two months before graduating, though later took some courses at a local  business school. 
 

*53. *John Mackey, founder of Whole Foods. Enrolled and dropped out college six times. 
 

*54.* John Paul DeJoria,  billionaire co-founder of John Paul Mitchell Systems, founder of Patron  Spirits tequilla. Joined the Navy after high school. 
 

*55.* Joyce C. Hall, founder of Hallmark. Started selling greeting cards at the age of 18. Did not attend college. 
 

*56. *Kemmons Wilson, multimillionaire, founder of Holiday Inn. High school dropout. 
 

*57.* Kenneth Hendricks, billionaire founder of ABC Supply. High school dropout. 
 

*58.* Kenny Johnson, founder of Dial-A-Waiter restaurant delivery. College dropout. 
 

*59. *Kevin Rose, founder of Digg.com. Dropped out of college during his second year. 
 

*60. *Kirk Kerkorian, billionaire investor, owner of Mandalay Bay and Mirage Resorts, and MGM movie studio. Dropped out eighth-grade. 
 

*61. *Larry Ellison, billionaire co-founder of Oracle software company. Dropped out of two different colleges. 
 

*62.* Leandro Rizzuto, billionaire founder of Conair. Dropped out of college. Started Conair with $100 and hot-air hair roller invention. 
 

*63. *Leslie Wexner, billionaire founder of a Limited Brands. Dropped out of law school. Started the Limited with $5,000. 
 

*64. *Marc Rich, commodities investor, billionaire. Founder of Marc Rich & Co. Did not finish college. 
 

*65.* Marcus Loew, multimillionaire founder of Loews theaters, co-founder of MGM movie studio. Elementary school dropout. 
 

*66. *Mark Ecko, founder of Mark Ecko Enterprises. Dropped out of college. 
 

*67. *Mary Kay Ash, founder of Mary Kay Inc. Did not attend college. 
 

*68. *Michael Dell, billionaire founder of Dell Computers, which started out of his college dorm room. Dropped out of college. 
 

*69. *Michael Rubin, founder of Global Sports. Dropped out of college in his first year. 
 

*70.* Micky Jagtiani, billionaire retailer, Landmark International. Dropped out of accounting school. 
 

*71.* Milton Hershey, founder of Hershey's Milk Chocolate. 4th grade education. 
 

*72.* Pete Cashmore, founder of Mashable.com at the age of 19. 
 

*73.* Philip Green, Topshop billionaire retail mogul. Dropped out of high school. 
 

*74. *Rachael Ray, Food Network cooking show star, food industry entrepreneur, with no formal culinary arts training. Never attended college. 
 

*75. *Ray Kroc, founder of McDonalds. Dropped out of high school. 
 

*76.* Richard Branson, billionaire founder of Virgin Records, Virgin Atlantic Airways, Virgin Mobile, and more. Dropped out of high school at 16. 
 

*77. *Richard DeVos, co-founder of Amway. Served in the Army and did not attend college. 
 

*78.* Richard Schulze, Best Buy founder. Did not attend college. 
 

*79. *Rob Kalin, founder of Etsy.  Flunked out of high school, enrolled in art school for a time, faked a  student ID at MIT so he could take classes. His professors subsequently  helped him get into NYU, they were so impressed. 
 

*80.* Ron Popeil, multimillionaire founder of Ronco, inventor, producer, infomercial star. Did not finish college. 
 

*81. *Rush Limbaugh, multi-millionaire media mogul, radio talk show host. Dropped out of college. 
 

*82. *Russell Simmons, co-founder of Def Jam records, founder of Russell Simmons Music Group, Phat Farm fashions, bestselling author. Did not finish college. 
 

*83.* S. Daniel Abraham, founder of Slim-Fast, billionaire. Did not attend college. 
 

*84. *Sean John Combs, entertainer, producer, fashion designer, and entrepreneur. Never finished college. 
 

*85. *Shawn Fanning, developer of Napster. Dropped out of college at the age of 19. 
 

*86. *Simon Cowell, TV producer, music judge, American Idol, The X Factor, and Britains Got Talent. High school dropout. 
 

*87. *Steve Madden, shoe designer. Dropped out of college. 
 

*88. *Steve Wozniak, co-founder of Apple, billionaire. Did not complete college. 
 

*89. *Ted Murphy, founder of social media company Izea Entertainment. Dropped out of college. 
 

*90. *Theodore Waitt, billionaire founder of Gateway Computers. Dropped out of college to start Gateway  one semester before graduating. 
 

*91. *Thomas Edison, inventor of the lightbulb, phonograph, and more. Primarily home-schooled, then joined the railroad when he was only 12. 
 

*92. *Tom Anderson, co-founder and friend of MySpace. Dropped out of high school. 
 

*93. *Ty Warner, billionaire developer of Beanie Babies, real estate investor, and hotel owner. Dropped out of college. 
 

*94. *Vidal Sassoon, founder of Vidal Sassoon, multimillionaire. Dropped out of high school. 
 

*95. *W. Clement Stone, multimillionaire insurance man, author, founder of Success magazine. Dropped out of elementary school. Later attended high school, graduating. Attended but did not finish college. 
 

*96. *W.T. Grant, founder of W.T. Grant department stores, multimillionaire. Dropped out of high school. 
 

*97. *Wally "Famous" Amos, multimillionaire entrepreneur, author, talent agent, founder of Famous Amos cookies. Left high school at 17 to join the Air Force. 
 

*98. *Walt Disney, founder of the Walt Disney Company. Dropped out of high school at 16. 
 

*99. *Wolfgang Puck, chef, owner of 16 restaurants and 80 bistros. Quit school at the age of 14. 
 

*100.* Y.C. Wang, billionaire founder of Formosa Plastics. Did not attend high school.


----------



## unpopular (Nov 5, 2012)

Christopher Columbus wasn't educated?

Well that explains a lot, actually. A whole lot.


----------



## runnah (Nov 5, 2012)

So when should I use manual mode?


----------



## table1349 (Nov 5, 2012)

unpopular,

I think you sig is wrong.  Isn't it supposed to read...

75% of the internet is pornography.  The rest is wrong.


----------



## unpopular (Nov 5, 2012)

runnah said:


> So when should I use manual mode?



Whenever you don't need AE.


----------



## table1349 (Nov 5, 2012)

runnah said:


> So when should I use manual mode?



When you know how to use it and it fits the situation.


----------



## unpopular (Nov 5, 2012)

gryphonslair99 said:


> unpopular,
> 
> I think you sig is wrong.  Isn't it supposed to read...
> 
> 75% of the internet is pornography.  The rest is wrong.



If that were true, why do I keep seeing the same girls over and over?


----------



## table1349 (Nov 5, 2012)

I didn't say it was NEW porn, just that it was porn.


----------



## fjrabon (Nov 5, 2012)

runnah said:


> So when should I use manual mode?



whenever you use strobes.  That's the only time you _*should*_ use manual.  The rest is sort of personal preference.  Though you *should* feel comfortable shooting manual in a lot of situations, so that you can decide what mode works best for you based on using them all and figuring out which works best, not because you just never really got used to one or another.


----------



## runnah (Nov 5, 2012)

I think I lost my manual when I moved, can I still use manual mode? Or do I need to order another manual?


----------



## unpopular (Nov 5, 2012)

it depends, are you shooting Canon?


----------



## runnah (Nov 5, 2012)

I would probably use my xerox to print out the manual. Does that help?


----------



## unpopular (Nov 5, 2012)

there will be some loss in IQ. but one copy should be fine.

OH! And don't forget to use the "auto" button on the copier.


----------



## Ysarex (Nov 5, 2012)

runnah said:


> So when should I use manual mode?



When you're using an external meter.
When you're using strobes.
When you shoot a panorama.

Joe


----------



## unpopular (Nov 5, 2012)

when that's what you've been doing for at least 15 years and you're too stubborn to change.


----------



## runnah (Nov 5, 2012)

unpopular said:


> there will be some loss in IQ. but one copy should be fine.
> 
> OH! And don't forget to use the "auto" button on the copier.



*scoffs* I only print my manuals about manual settings by using the manual printer settings AND the manual paper feed tray!


----------



## pixmedic (Nov 5, 2012)

runnah said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> > there will be some loss in IQ. but one copy should be fine.
> ...



screw that! that's TOO automated! you need to learn the basics first... I manually reprint MY manuals with parchment and a feather dipped in ink I made from scratch!


----------



## fjrabon (Nov 5, 2012)

pixmedic said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> > unpopular said:
> ...



If ain't written in stone by the finger of God, it ain't worth reading.


----------



## unpopular (Nov 5, 2012)

runnah said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> > there will be some loss in IQ. but one copy should be fine.
> ...



THERE IS NO REASON TO USE MANUAL PAPER FEED unless you're using posterboard! It's doing the exact same thing and modern paper feeds are equipped with feedback sensors that all but eliminate paper jams.


----------



## pixmedic (Nov 5, 2012)

fjrabon said:


> pixmedic said:
> 
> 
> > runnah said:
> ...



damn...burned. I got nothing.


----------



## runnah (Nov 5, 2012)

unpopular said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> > unpopular said:
> ...



You would think that being an amateur... Those of us in the industry look down our collective noses at such things.


----------



## TruckerDave (Nov 5, 2012)

Who gives a damn what mode you use? Only two things matter at the end of the day...1)did you get the shot you wanted. 2) are you happy with the result.  Use whatever mode you are comfortable with to get the shot, and if that is M,A, S,P or full auto so be it.


----------



## unpopular (Nov 5, 2012)

runnah said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> > runnah said:
> ...



Said like a true Craig's List Copy Shop. Most pros these days use automated paper feed. I mean, perhaps it works better on your cheap Brother All In One, but the real pros with Xerox and Technics workhorses know they can rely on auto paper feed when it really matters, even with large format reproduction.

And when was the last time you heard of an offset press using manual feed? Like they're printing tens of thousands of impressions one sheet at a time. Give me a break, you're just a MWAC (mother with a copier).


----------



## Derrel (Nov 6, 2012)

fjrabon,
Your OP was soooooo lengthy that I took the liberty of condensing it, for those who want the tasty bite-sized morsels we've come to expect. So...here it is, your post, condensed, using modern methods designed to convey the most information in the fewest words, and with the greatest comedic and satirical effect. This condensed, bastardized, hybridized, utterly-butchered version of your post is, if you will, designed for the "*Green Box*" sub-set of shooters.

*How I transitioned to mostly manual, and why/when I use it*

"There's been a lot of talk around here lately.


Manual can be very daunting. Aperture priority is quite an amazing thing, especially in modern Nikon cameras with matrix metering.So, let's say I'm in A mode, Let's say that I dialed the perfect settings.Snap it, great. Next, in order to stand out, you can't do what everybody else is doing. And that's what A mode does. 


Luckily for me, I was more or less forced into shooting M mode.Manual is a PITA if you have to hold down a little button to adjust shutter speed. And really, there's nothing wrong with shooting in A mode. A *huge number* of photographers shoot this way.Things are a bit more complicated than that, but that's all we need to know for now. If you just want a standard looking exposure, just shoot in A mode, or even P mode. Fiddling with the buttons to get yourself there is the easy part, though that's perhaps what seems daunting to people starting off.  that makes you a photographer instead of just a snapshooter. 


Shooting a black dog is tough, because naturally the eye is drawn to light things, so you have to work a bit harder.I'm not saying any of this is better or worse than anything else, that's just how I do it. Feel free to take whatever you'd like and discard whatever you'd like."


----------



## imagemaker46 (Nov 6, 2012)

It's threads like this that become pointless to me personally, but important for the technical geeks to pour through all the manuals and the regurgitate out the information.  While the information for some is helpful.  I stopped reading this thread a few pages ago, I expect so did many others.

How to take a simple thing like photography and make it sound complicated.


----------



## KmH (Nov 6, 2012)

fjrabon said:


> I guess I should have bolded the parts where I said several times that the other modes all have their uses, and that I use all of them


In your OP just click on Edit, and bold to your hearts content.


----------

