<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Why You Should Be in Manual Exposure Mode 99% of the Time When Photographing Birds. Period.	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.birdsasart-blog.com/baa/2023/01/22/why-you-should-be-in-manual-exposure-mode-99-of-the-time-when-photographing-birds-period/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.birdsasart-blog.com/baa/2023/01/22/why-you-should-be-in-manual-exposure-mode-99-of-the-time-when-photographing-birds-period/</link>
	<description>The blog of bird photographer Arthur Morris</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Mar 2025 15:19:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.8</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Steven Schiff		</title>
		<link>https://www.birdsasart-blog.com/baa/2023/01/22/why-you-should-be-in-manual-exposure-mode-99-of-the-time-when-photographing-birds-period/comment-page-1/#comment-2009523</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Steven Schiff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2023 02:57:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.birdsasart-blog.com/?p=84637#comment-2009523</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I find it fascinating that we still have to go through this exposure compensation rigamarole or use manual exposure settings when our cameras have supposedly sophisticated evaluative light meters. The whole idea behind these meters was that they were supposed to detect, and compensate for, the effects of differently-illuminated backgrounds, foregrounds, and other non-subject picture elements.

Evaluative metering was first introduced by Nikon in the FA camera of 1983. Nikon called it &quot;matrix metering*,&quot; and it broke the scene up into 5 segments, which it evaluated individually. Supposedly it compared the scene with thousands of photographic scenes programmed into its memory and selected a final exposure which would take into account unusual elements such as bright or dark subjects, backgrounds, and backlighting.

Matrix metering revolutionized photographic light metering, and all cameras of all brands now use a version of it. But it seems that, even with this sophisticated tool at our disposal, we must still override the meter and depend on our our photographic judgement and experience in order to get the best possible exposure out of our cameras in many situations.

*The FA had what Nikon called AMP, or &quot;automatic multi-pattern&quot; metering. As it was improved and incorporated into additional camera models, Nikon rechristened it &quot;matrix metering,&quot; which is a trademarked term. Other brands have to use different names for their versions of evaluative metering.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I find it fascinating that we still have to go through this exposure compensation rigamarole or use manual exposure settings when our cameras have supposedly sophisticated evaluative light meters. The whole idea behind these meters was that they were supposed to detect, and compensate for, the effects of differently-illuminated backgrounds, foregrounds, and other non-subject picture elements.</p>
<p>Evaluative metering was first introduced by Nikon in the FA camera of 1983. Nikon called it &#8220;matrix metering*,&#8221; and it broke the scene up into 5 segments, which it evaluated individually. Supposedly it compared the scene with thousands of photographic scenes programmed into its memory and selected a final exposure which would take into account unusual elements such as bright or dark subjects, backgrounds, and backlighting.</p>
<p>Matrix metering revolutionized photographic light metering, and all cameras of all brands now use a version of it. But it seems that, even with this sophisticated tool at our disposal, we must still override the meter and depend on our our photographic judgement and experience in order to get the best possible exposure out of our cameras in many situations.</p>
<p>*The FA had what Nikon called AMP, or &#8220;automatic multi-pattern&#8221; metering. As it was improved and incorporated into additional camera models, Nikon rechristened it &#8220;matrix metering,&#8221; which is a trademarked term. Other brands have to use different names for their versions of evaluative metering.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Richard Curtin		</title>
		<link>https://www.birdsasart-blog.com/baa/2023/01/22/why-you-should-be-in-manual-exposure-mode-99-of-the-time-when-photographing-birds-period/comment-page-1/#comment-2009494</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard Curtin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Jan 2023 19:05:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.birdsasart-blog.com/?p=84637#comment-2009494</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Believe I prefer #2. Maybe because of such high contrast in #1. Thought it interesting (and a cause of envy in fixed wing pilots) is that on #1, the trailing left wing feathers indicate close to stall/less lift allowing it to be completely level in #2 where both wings have that appearance. They don’t have to worry about installing ailerons. Anyway, the only way of appreciating this is the amazing sharpness of both images.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Believe I prefer #2. Maybe because of such high contrast in #1. Thought it interesting (and a cause of envy in fixed wing pilots) is that on #1, the trailing left wing feathers indicate close to stall/less lift allowing it to be completely level in #2 where both wings have that appearance. They don’t have to worry about installing ailerons. Anyway, the only way of appreciating this is the amazing sharpness of both images.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
