jeremy_wakefield

<p>Thank you Colin. Some good information there. I was using bare speedlites so you're probably right and that combined with the jpeg rendering on my LCD is the answer to my issue.</p> <p>I haven't tried the profile you mention and I might give it a go. Thanks for the suggestion</p>

<p>Hi again.</p> <p>Hmm. Humble pie time I'm afraid.</p> <p>I've just got home and had a proper look on my computer. When I look at the RAW file in LR there are only a very small number of overexposed highlights showing as clipped and they can mostly be recovered. It seems that it is the blinkies on my camera LCD that is suggesting that these highlights are significantly blown. They also looked blown on the camera histogram. I knew that these aren't 100% a reliable means of checking but it looked really blown out. </p> <p>Normally if shooting at an event, I use the blinkies for exposure checking. I knew there was a margin for safety but there's obviously a lot more latitude than I thought. Just goes to show you. I don't recall having this safety net with my 5D mk 1. Do you know if the blinky safety zone varied from individual camera copy to copy or just from model to model?</p> <p>Anyway, seems that the subject was just pretty contrasty and the jpeg preview was too much for it. If I use one of the camera calibration presets in LR it blows them again.</p> <p>Sorry folks. My mistake but thank you for your help and comments</p>

<p>I'm using the flash in manual mode though not ETTL. It isn't grotesquely overexposed just some of the highlights seem to be over</p>

<p>I have a meter which I use for setting up studio lights and particularly getting ratios fixed. However recently I've started using Speedlites a lot more ( age and portability issues ) and had some great results using them both on and off camera. I've just eyeballed it and adjusted as required if in manual mode. In ETTL I use a quick flick of the FEC to get what I want.</p> <p>Anyway, I decided it would be interesting to use my meter to get a quick and more accurate starting point, so I gave it a go. What I found is that using the meter setting I had a fair number of the lighter coloured areas blown and I needed to adjust accordingly.</p> <p>I was using the speed light near to the subject and I assumed it was the inverse Square law and increased contrast at work ( though I had assumed the meter would take care of this). However, I then noticed that photographing something in front of a light background meant the background sometimes was blown so it can't be that. </p> <p>I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong here so if you can help please do. It would be much appreciated.</p> <p>Thanks</p>

<p>Ah. Good to know, Will. I haven't tested that obviously. Thanks for clearing that up for me </p>

<p>Hi</p> <p>I am using the above with Canon 600 EX RT flashes. I can get it to work but I need to always fire a test flash before settings I adjust are transferred to the flash. I'm sure I'm missing something and there must be a way to do this without flashing everyone nearby but I'm missing it.</p> <p>Sorry if this is really obvious ( I'm sure it is ) but I'd appreciate a bit of help with it</p> <p>Thanks :-)</p>

<p>Hi<br /><br />While I've been scouring the internet trying to get feedback from camera users on how well their DSLR AF works, and I've noticed a number of references ( talking about DSLRs in general ) to using manual focus as if this would eliminate any AF inaccuracy.<br /><br />I cannot really see how this would improve the situation on any camera. (I'm not talking here about medium format or anything larger or more specialist ) <br /><br />1. The screen doesn't lend itself to MF surely? My film cameras with MF had a split prism section in the middle surrounded by a fresnel ring and then the rest was ground glass. Easy - peasy! I've yet to see a DSLR focus screen anywhere like as useful for this. Are people really managing it? I doubt I'd be more accurate than the AF using my D700s<br /><br />2. You could then rely on the AF point lighting up when you achieve focus by moving the ring, but then surely you're back to the same situation as using the AF system as regards accuracy? The point would light up at the same setting that the camera would choose for AF.<br /><br />3. Live view maybe is the only way I can imagine it but it really isn't practical in most portrait situations either in or out of the studio <br /><br />People, tell me what I'm missing<br> William<br /><br /></p>