{"id":33,"date":"2024-01-01T10:48:40","date_gmt":"2024-01-01T10:48:40","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.shawnmeanders.com\/blog\/?p=33"},"modified":"2024-01-01T10:48:40","modified_gmt":"2024-01-01T10:48:40","slug":"december-in-photography-day-28","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.shawnmeanders.com\/blog\/2024\/01\/01\/december-in-photography-day-28\/","title":{"rendered":"December in Photography – Day 28"},"content":{"rendered":"

\r\nThis article was written December 30\/31 2023<\/i>\r\n
\r\nWhile this post is for the 28th day, it is actually the first post I wrote.<\/i><\/b>\r\n<\/p>\r\n\r\n

\r\nFor day 28, it was already 7pm when I decided to take pictures. Thus, it was already dark, so I decided to go back to a mall where I’d taken pictures on Day 03. However, as I was walking outside, I got distracted by a few Christmas decorations, and ended up only taking outdoor pictures instead. \r\n<\/p>\r\n\r\n

Static Illuminated Buildings<\/h3>\r\n

\r\nTo start with, a few pictures of illuminated buildings:\r\n

\"\"
Eslite Mall
f\/5.6 – 1\/60sec – 24.0 mm – ISO 12800<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n
\"\"
Two malls
f\/5.6 – 1\/60 sec – 45.0 mm – ISO 12800<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\nThe first thing to notice about both of these images is that I had to use an extremely high ISO: 12800. My camera actually doesn’t offer it by default (I had to go through the settings to enable it). And despite this ISO, I still had to use a small aperture of f\/5.6, and a fairly low (at least when not using a tripod) shutter speed (1\/60sec). This is one of my main main challenges when taking pictures after dark, I either need to use a tripod for very low shutter speeds, or have more limited options.\r\n<\/p>\r\n

\r\nNext, you might also notice that these images have a grainy texture to them. That seems to be fairly common with dark pictures on this camera. I have yet to determine whether it’s related to the high ISO, the camera’s sensor itself, or a property of such photographs (Although I have read that more modern cameras have lower noise on high ISO). This grainy texture will definitely be a common theme for this day.\r\n<\/p>\r\n\r\n

Moving Traffic Against Static Building<\/h3>\r\n

\r\nI also tried to play with a lower shutter speed, capturing both a static background and some moving traffic. The lowest I was willing to go without a tripod (for this shot) was 1\/30sec, so I went for this, and adjusted my ISO to be a little lower.\r\n\r\n

\"\"
Mall front with moving car
f\/5.6 – 1\/30sec – 18.0mm – ISO 3200<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\n
\"\"
Mall front with moving vehicles
f\/5.6 – 1\/30sec – 18.0mm – ISO 3200<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\n
\"\"
Mall front with moving vehicles
f\/8.0 – 1\/30sec – 18.0mm – ISO 3200<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\nFor the first two, I used an aperture of f\/5.6, whereas for the last one, I tried an aperture of f\/8.0, a “who cares” aperture as per Bryan Peterson in his book Understanding Exposure<\/a>. Unfortunately, everything looks a little darker in this one, so I wonder if it might be underexposed (Although it could also be a matter of post-processing, which I haven’t started digging into yet). As is, I think my favorite is the second one, with the captured motion of the motorcycle, and the reflections in the mall’s glass windows. However, I do wish I would have captured more traffic, or maybe even had my tripod to get a longer exposure, maybe as high as 1sec.\r\n<\/p>\r\n\r\n

\r\n

Distant Buildings in the Dark<\/h3>\r\nThe highlight of this evening might have been to take pictures of buildings in the dark. Not something I’ve done much of before, in part due to the need for a slower shutter speed, and I tend to not be the steadiest of person. However, while I usually struggle at 1\/30sec with my 18-55mm lens, it seemed to go fine this time.\r\n
\"\"
Building in the distance
f\/8.0 – 1\/60sec – 28.0mm – ISO 3200<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\n
\"\"
Building in the distance
f\/8.0 – 1\/30sec – 24.0mm – ISO 3200<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\n
\"\"
Building in the distance
f\/8.0 – 1\/30sec – 24.0mm – ISO 12800<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\nHere, we can see a progression of clarity as I played with the ISO and the shutter speed. I did decide to hold an aperture of f\/8.0 though. I’m relatively happy with the exposure of the last picture, although I’m not sure about the framing of the other two rooftops at the bottom. I was hoping it would make for an entertaining foreground, but I’m not convinced with the result.\r\n<\/p>\r\n\r\n

\r\nNext, I captured these twin buildings.\r\n

\"\"
Twin Buildings
f\/5.6 – 1\/30sec – 25.0mm – ISO 12800<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\n
\"\"
Twin Buildings
f\/5.6 – 1\/30sec – 21.0mm – ISO 12800<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\nWith this second picture, I was hoping that adding the top of the other building with the tree would help bring some good contrast, but I honestly think the first one works much better. The focus is clear, and there’s a grandeur to it. While the framing isn’t perfect (With that other cropped building to the right), I do like the color of the sky in the background.\r\n
\r\nMeanwhile, the second picture has a bunch of glare from different light sources, along with a surreal one on the top right corner.\r\n<\/p>\r\n\r\n

\r\nAn extra burst of buildings. This time, I’ll skip the gradual exposure attempts.\r\n

\"\"
Building
f\/5.6 – 1\/15sec – 42.0mm – ISO 12800<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\n
\"\"
Building
f\/5.6 – 1\/15sec – 32.0mm – ISO 6400<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\nFor both of these pictures, I used a shutter speed of 1\/15sec. I’m honestly shocked they came out as sharp as they did with such a slow shutter speed. My main complaint with both are the bright lights in some locations. \r\nFor the first picture, I think if I’d framed it slightly higher, such that the bottom light wasn’t present, it would have been a much better picture (Cropping might yet save it).\r\n
\r\nFor the second picture, I also tried to use an ISO of 6400 instead of 12800 to see if that would affect the graininess. I honestly cannot notice a difference. Otherwise, I think the building is unfortunately simultaneously too bright and too dark. The lights on the side are overexposed, and the front of the building is, in some places, underexposed. I think having a sensor that can handle more full-stops might be what I need to make such pictures viable.\r\n\r\n
\"\"
Building
f\/4.0 – 1\/30sec – 28.0mm – ISO 12800<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\nThis one is ok, but I do have a few qualms with it. Obviously, the lights at the top gave me some exposure grief. But I think my biggest concern is the asymmetry between both sides, especially apparent at the bottom of the picture. And while the viewfinder having a 95% coverage does complicate framing ever-so-slightly, this can still be double-checked on the display after taking a picture.\r\n
\r\nOne unexpected aspect of the picture I enjoy are the contrasts between different levels being either lighted or not. I especially enjoy the one with the plants on it.\r\n<\/p>\r\n\r\n

\r\n

\"\"
Building
f\/4.0 – 1\/15sec – 18.0mm – ISO 6400<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\n
\"\"
Building
f\/4.0 – 1\/30sec – 18.0mm – ISO 12800<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\nThere are two differences between these pictures:\r\n
    \r\n
  • The framing<\/li>\r\n
  • The Exposure exchanged Shutter Speed for ISO, keeping the same “light meter” reading (Both were changed by one full f-stop)<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\nFirst, regarding the change in ISO, I now notice a clear difference in graininess, ISO 12800 definitely feels grainier here. Thus, I might need to start looking into using a smaller ISO when taking pictures at night, possibly carrying my tripod more often (although that’s quite the chore).\r\n<\/p>\r\n

    \r\nNext, regarding the framing. While I thought it would feel “cleaner” to align the building roughly with the frame of the picture in the second one, I think I prefer the first picture. There’s a better sense of symmetry, and the continuous sky helps elevate the sensation of vertigo, enhancing the perspective.\r\n<\/p>\r\n\r\n

    Decorations<\/h3>\r\n

    \r\n

    \"\"
    Christmas Decorations
    f\/8.0 – 1\/60sec – 18.0mm – ISO 3200<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\nThese Christmas decorations looked cute, so I wanted to shoot them. Unfortunately, while in person they were nice looking, I don’t think the venue was conducive to good pictures, at least from this angle. The windows showing the inside of the building are a little underwhelming, and this background wall is a little drab when contrasted with such decorations. Everything else is also too bright to allow the decorations to shine through. There might be a way to deal with it for the photographer, but unfortunately, I currently cannot manage it.\r\n<\/p>\r\n\r\n

    \r\n

    \"\"
    Christmas Decorations
    f\/8.0 – 1\/60sec – 55.0mm – ISO 3200<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\nI decided to try to isolate the reindeer, which I kind of like. Unfortunately, some of the problems are still present. I should probably have tried to take the picture from a higher angle, such that the window wouldn’t be in the frame.\r\n<\/p>\r\n\r\n

    \r\n

    \"\"
    Christmas Decorations
    f\/8.0 – 1\/125sec – 55.0mm – ISO 400<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\n
    \"\"
    Christmas Decorations
    f\/8.0 – 1\/125sec – 55.0mm – ISO 800<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\n
    \"\"
    Christmas Decorations
    f\/8.0 – 1\/60sec – 55.0mm – ISO 800<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\n
    \"\"
    Christmas Decorations
    f\/8.0 – 1\/60sec – 55.0mm – ISO 1600<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\nI kind of like the charm of the first two pictures, where the background is almost completely dark, with just some very dark patterns in the background. However, not as much of a fan of the last two, where the background starts appearing, although it kind of still works. On the last one, however, I think the flare on the lights is becoming a little too distracting.\r\n<\/p>\r\n\r\n

    \r\n

    \"\"
    Christmas Decorations
    f\/8.0 – 1\/60sec – 42.0mm – ISO 1600<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n
    \"\"
    Christmas Decorations
    f\/8.0 – 1\/60sec – 41.0mm – ISO 3200 – Flash on<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\n
    \"\"
    Christmas Decorations
    f\/8.0 – 1\/60sec – 48.0mm – ISO 3200<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\n
    \"\"
    Christmas Decorations
    f\/8.0 – 1\/125sec – 49.0mm – ISO 400 – Flash on<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\nOn these pictures, I tried to see the difference using the flash would make. I personally don’t like it at all with these light decorations. I think it completely ruins their magic. If I wanted them to have a brighter background, I should have gone for a longer exposure instead. (I really should have brought my tripod)\r\n\r\n<\/p>\r\n

    \r\n

    \"\"
    Love Christmas Decorations
    f\/5.6 – 1\/125sec – 39.0mm – ISO 1600<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\n
    \"\"
    Love Christmas Decorations
    f\/5.6 – 1\/125sec – 39.0mm – ISO 3200<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\n
    \"\"
    Love Christmas Decorations
    f\/5.6 – 1\/60sec – 36.0mm – ISO 3200<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\n
    \"\"
    Love Christmas Decorations
    f\/5.6 – 1\/125sec – 36.0mm – ISO 3200<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\n
    \"\"
    Love Christmas Decorations
    f\/5.6 – 1\/60sec – 36.0mm – ISO 3200<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\n
    \"\"
    Love Christmas Decorations
    f\/5.6 – 1\/90sec – 36.0mm – ISO 3200<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\nFirst of all, I’d like to point out that the last three pictures I took were all blurry. Just a reminder that sometimes, you get so focused on something that you miss out on the most important of details. I focused so much on the exposure that I missed something as simple as the focus.\r\n
    \r\nNext, while the first picture might be considered less well exposed than the other ones, I think it’s still my favorite of the bunch. I think exposing for the street here is wrong. My impression is that a much darker street makes the decorations stand out more, which should definitely be my goal here. (Although I’m sure that’s something I could fix in post-processing with the other pictures). It’s also, for some reason, the picture I feel is best framed amongst the bunch. The only thing I would consider fixing on this picture would be to crop out the top of it, removing a chunk of the dark sky and the street lamp on the right. Although even then, I think I still enjoy the presence of this dark sky, showing how this warmth “pierces through the cold night”.\r\n<\/p>\r\n\r\n

    \r\n

    \"\"
    Reindeer Decoration
    f\/5.6 – 1\/30sec – 30.0mm – ISO 3200<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\nI kind of like this picture. I’m happy with the framing and relatively happy with the exposure. My main complaints would be:\r\n
      \r\n
    • I think the focus isn’t that great, although that could be a personal stabilization issue, considering this was at a 1\/30sec shutter speed. I probably should have used a larger aperture as well, either f\/8 or f\/11 (If I could afford to do it).<\/li>\r\n
    • The warmth of the picture changes from the left to the right, with the right side being colder. Maybe I should have used the Tungsten white balance instead of cloudy, though apparently that can be fixed in post-processing.<\/li>\r\n
    • That sign above the main reindeer is a little distracting, although at least it isn’t extremely overexposed.<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/p>\r\n\r\n

      Low traffic<\/h3>\r\n

      \r\n

      \"\"
      Low Traffic
      f\/5.6 – 1\/30sec – 47.0mm – ISO 1600<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\n
      \"\"
      Low Traffic
      f\/5.6 – 1\/30sec – 47.0mm – ISO 3200<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\n
      \"\"
      Low Traffic
      f\/5.6 – 1\/15sec – 47.0mm – ISO 1600<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\n
      \"\"
      Low Traffic
      f\/5.6 – 1\/15sec – 47.0mm – ISO 1600<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\nFor these pictures, we can see a progression towards the kind of effect I was looking for. On the first picture, I was not impressed with the exposure, so I adjusted it.\r\n<\/p>

      \r\nFrom the second picture onward, I’m generally happy with the exposure. I really like the effect it has on the trees for instance. Obviously, I’m disappointed about the store-fronts, but I’m a little limited on that front currently.\r\n<\/p>

      \r\nThen, from the second to the third picture, I kept the same level of exposure, but lowered the shutter speed (adjusting both the shutter speed and ISO by a full f-stop). The effect of movement from the vehicles is much more pronounced and satisfying now.\r\n<\/p>

      \r\nFinally, the third picture was poorly timed, with the moving vehicle barely in frame, whereas the last picture has it properly in the foreground.\r\n<\/p>\r\n\r\n

      Busy Street<\/h3>\r\n

      \r\n

      \r\n

      \"\"
      Busy Street
      f\/5.6 – 1\/60sec – 55.0mm – ISO 6400<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\n
      \"\"
      Busy Street
      f\/5.6 – 1\/30sec – 55.0mm – ISO 1600<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\n
      \"\"
      Busy Street
      f\/5.6 – 1\/30sec – 55.0mm – ISO 1600<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\n
      \"\"
      Busy Street
      f\/5.6 – 1\/30sec – 55.0mm – ISO 1600<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\n
      \"\"
      Busy Street
      f\/5.6 – 1\/30sec – 55.0mm – ISO 1600<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\nHere, we have a busy street that I wanted to capture, to show the liveliness of Taipei. (An annoyance with these pictures is that I went in and manually tried to crop out license plates).\r\n<\/p>

      \r\nThe first picture feels a little overexposed, which is fixed on subsequent pictures. Meanwhile, I was trying something “innovative” with the second picture, but that fell flat. I wanted to capture less of the immediate street, and more of the storefront and buildings. Unfortunately, that wasn’t really a good option considering the contrast in brightness.\r\n<\/p>

      \r\nI think my favorite of these is the fourth picture (the penultimate one). The traffic feels more linear and directed on this one. In the third picture, the scooter in the foreground, and the distance in traffic, break that continuity. Meanwhile, in the last picture, the foreground feels too vacant. I really feel like the fourth picture strikes a nice balance here. \r\n<\/p>\r\n\r\n

      Food<\/h3>\r\n

      \r\nFinally, a few food-related pictures, from a street vendor selling duck. For our vegetarian and vegan friends, I apologize and suggest scrolling ahead.\r\n<\/p>

      \r\nWhile I didn’t add them here, a lot of my pictures had a focus issue. I think part of this is excitedly trying to get action live, and also the use of f\/5.6 aperture. I should probably have gone for f\/8.0 or f\/11.0.\r\n

      \"\"
      Duck Street Food
      f\/5.6 – 1\/60sec – 47.0mm – ISO 1600<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\n
      \"\"
      Duck Street Food
      f\/5.6 – 1\/60sec – 47.0mm – ISO 3200]<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\nNow, the pictures I actually kept. First, I’m really happy with the pictures of the hanging ducks. I think there’s a really nice contrast and reflection to it, and the warmth is really nice. Though I definitely prefer the first of the two pictures.\r\n<\/p>

      \r\n

      \"\"
      Duck Street Food
      f\/5.6 – 1\/125sec – 55.0mm – ISO 3200<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\n
      \"\"
      Duck Street Food
      f\/5.6 – 1\/125sec – 55.0mm – ISO 6400<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\nThe two pictures where the duck is being blow-torched are decent, though I think the second one is better exposed. I do like how the details of the flame are present here, in different colors. It might be worth cropping the second one to only show the duck and the flames.\r\n<\/p>

      \r\n\"\"\r\n

      \"\"
      Duck Street Food
      f\/5.6 – 1\/125sec – 55.0mm – ISO 6400<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\nThe first picture is fairly standard with a clear framing. It might still be worth cropping it to drop unimportant details. As for the second picture, I feel like there’s too much verticality to it, both elements of focus being too spread apart. It’s also not really meant to exist in a vacuum, but as part of a continuation with the previous images, creating a “story”. But for any of you who enjoy this kind of food, I hope it’s making you hungry.\r\n<\/p>

      \r\nA final note about these picture, they do have an orange tint to them, likely due to the kind of White Balance I used. I personally like it, especially<\/i> on the hanging ducks pictures. However, it might be more professional to change it, which should be doable in post-processing.\r\n<\/p>\r\n\r\n

      Favorite Picture of the Day<\/h2>\r\n
      \"\"
      Love Christmas Decorations
      f\/5.6 – 1\/125sec – 39.0mm – ISO 1600<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\nAmongst all of the pictures I’ve taken on this day, I think the above one might be my favorite. It might not be the best objectively or from a technical point of view, but I think it has a sense of serenity to it that I really enjoy.\r\n\r\n

      Dishonorable Mentions<\/h2>\r\n

      \r\nWhile successes are important, I think failures are equally, if not more, important when it comes to learning and progressing. Thus, here are some of the underwhelming pictures I took. Enjoy.\r\n<\/p>\r\n

      Illuminated trees<\/h3>\r\n

      \r\nAround the beginning, there were a few illuminated trees I tried to photograph. Unfortunately, trying not to have their lights overexposed meant the trees they were attached to were underexposed, giving a less than desirable result.\r\n\r\n

      \r\n

      \"\"
      Lighted Trees
      f\/8.0 – 1\/60sec – 45.0mm – ISO 3200<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\nThe exposure on this one is awful. The trees are underexposed, and the background light is overexposed. Overall, fairly disappointing.\r\n<\/p>\r\n

      \r\n

      \"\"
      Lighted Trees in front of a Starbucks
      f\/8.0 – 1\/60sec – 37.0mm – ISO 3200<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\nIn this photo, the trees are once again underexposed, the starbucks logo overexposed, and the framing is bad. The left half of the frame serves no purpose.\r\n<\/p>\r\n\r\n

      \r\n

      \"\"
      Illuminated Trees in front of a Starbucks
      f\/8.0 – f\/60sec – 25.0mm – ISO 6400<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\nThis is probably the best picture of the bunch. The restaurant feels warm and the lights on the trees offer an interesting contrast. The main issue is with the framing. It should be more focused on the restaurant.\r\n<\/p>\r\n\r\n

      \r\n

      \"\"
      Illuminated Trees in front of Starbucks – Vertical
      f\/8.0 – 1\/60sec – 34.0 mm – ISO 6400<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\nIt seems like I noticed the framing issues and tried to adjust by going vertical. Unfortunately, even here there are framing issues. I should have pointed a little more to the left (Both to capture more of the window, and avoid the sign on the right), and the top part of the picture serves no purpose, distracting from the overall picture. Though I suppose this part could always be cropped.\r\n<\/p>\r\n\r\n

      \r\n

      \"\"
      Illuminated Trees in Front of a Mall
      f\/8.0 – 1\/30sec – 18.0 mm – ISO 6400<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\nThis one has, in my opinion, too may bright spots to draw your attention, and yet a huge dark spot around the top. The street lamp is also undesirable. The framing should probably be more focused on the trees themselves, but even then, there are some overexposed lights behind the trees.\r\n<\/p>\r\n\r\n

      \r\n

      \"\"
      Awkward Timing with Dynamic Lights
      f\/8.0 – 1\/30sec – 18.0mm – ISO 6400<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\nOn this one, my timing with the lights was awful. These are dynamic lights meant to represent movement, and thus aren’t always on. Despite the 1\/30sec shutter speed, I managed to barely get any light from them. But it’s an important reminder of the importance of timing with a picture.\r\n<\/p>\r\n\r\n

      \r\n

      \"\"
      Lighted Trees on the Street
      f\/8.0 – 1\/20sec – 43mm – ISO 6400<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\nThis one once again had issues with overexposure, especially with the cars and storefronts. Too much bright light. However, the trees themselves have a nice exposure.\r\n<\/p>\r\n\r\n

      \r\n

      \"\"
      Illuminated Trees on the Street – Blurry
      f\/8.0 – 1\/30sec – 55.0mm – ISO 6400<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\nAnd the final picture of those illuminated trees. It’s a shame, this one has blur issues, because otherwise I think there’s a lot of good going for it. Though once again, there are a lot of bright spots.\r\n<\/p>\r\n\r\n

      \r\nAnd with this, I didn’t manage to get any picture of those trees that I was satisfied with.\r\n<\/p>\r\n\r\n

      Street Traffic<\/h3>\r\n

      \r\n

      \"\"
      Busy street
      f\/8.0 – 1\/30sec – 29.0mm – ISO 12800
      Edited to remove license plates<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\n
      \"\"
      Busy street
      f\/8.0 – 1\/30sec – 37.0mm – ISO 12800
      Edited to remove license plates<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\n
      \"\"
      Busy street – Vertical
      f\/8.0 – 1\/30sec – 18.0mm – ISO 12800<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\nThese pictures have clear light flares, which is not that great, but does give it a nightly-style. The first one in particular, with moving heads in the foreground has an interesting look to it. However, the framing isn’t great. There’s too much emptiness from the sky and dark buildings. And somehow, on that last picture, I decided to double down on it, presumably to give it a sense of grandeur. While it doesn’t work that well, I will admit that doubling down on it lends a better result, since there’s a clear purpose to that “emptiness”, now taking most of the picture, instead of just drawing the eye away. Proportions definitely have an impact on intent.\r\n<\/p>\r\n\r\n

      Traffic against distant building<\/h3>\r\n

      \r\n

      \"\"
      City Street Against Building
      f\/8.0 – 1\/30sec – 30.0mm – ISO 12800<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\n
      \"\"
      City Street Against Building
      f\/8.0 – 1\/30sec – 30.0mm – ISO 12800<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\n\r\n
      \"\"
      City Street Against Building
      f\/8.0 – 1\/30sec – 45.0mm – ISO 12800<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\nFirst of all, let’s start with the first picture. It is clearly askew, which was somewhat corrected in the next two pictures. While holding the camera for a shot, I sometimes find it difficult to evaluate the angle, especially when going for a portrait orientation.\r\n
      \r\nBeyond that, the exposure for this one is wrong. Not so much because a perfect exposure would exist, but the darker parts of the picture seem under-exposed, and the street itself has lights that are overexposed. Whereas for the car lights and street lamps, this feels almost artistic (a tad less exposed would be almost perfect), for the store fronts it feels all wrong. Unfortunately, I think I would need either a camera with a sensor offering a better dynamic range, or possibly a graduated ND filter, which would allow less light to go for some parts of the image, and not for others, hopefully resulting in a more even exposure. (My understanding is that this type of filter is usually used to help exposure when a bright sky is part of the photo, compensating for it’s added brightness. However, I don’t see why it couldn’t be used for the opposite effect, such as for this sort of picture.)\r\n<\/p>\r\n\r\n

      Building with tree <\/h3>\r\n

      \r\n

      \"\"
      Building
      f\/5.6 – 1\/30sec – 55.0mm – ISO 12800<\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\nI think there’s a lot wrong with this picture. Everything is out of focus and the tree isn’t sharp. The lighting of the tree is also off. But if I’d zoomed in a little more to avoid the weird lighting of the tree, and properly focused on the building, I think this could have had potential.\r\n<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

      This article was written December 30\/31 2023 While this post is for the 28th day, it is actually the first post I wrote. For day 28, it was already 7pm when I decided to take pictures. Thus, it was already dark, so I decided to go back to a mall where I’d taken pictures on … Continue reading December in Photography – Day 28<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"bgseo_title":"","bgseo_description":"","bgseo_robots_index":"index","bgseo_robots_follow":"follow","footnotes":""},"categories":[3,2],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-33","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-photography","category-skill-learning"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.shawnmeanders.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/33","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.shawnmeanders.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.shawnmeanders.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.shawnmeanders.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.shawnmeanders.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=33"}],"version-history":[{"count":10,"href":"https:\/\/www.shawnmeanders.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/33\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":184,"href":"https:\/\/www.shawnmeanders.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/33\/revisions\/184"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.shawnmeanders.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=33"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.shawnmeanders.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=33"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.shawnmeanders.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=33"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}