Nikon D750 - Experiments at ISO 12800

I was actually playing around with Auto ISO which I haven't used much
in the past and found I had taken a number of shots at ISO 12800. The
following are unadjusted JPGs of the original raw files. There is no
rhyme or reason to the aperture and speed settings.

Here is the sun setting behind the hills encircling the town of
Whitianga, Mercury Bay where Captain Cook stopped to make a number of
observations of the planet Mercury. f/4 at 1/400 sec.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501956.jpg

This one is a friend watching the television broadcast of Serena
Williams being demolished by Angelique Kerber in the Australian open.
f/4 at 1/400 sec
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501958.jpg

Finally we are in the bowels of a 19th century gold-ore stamper in the
town of Thames. f/8 at 1/10 sec.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501973.jpg
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 2016-02-03 01:02:26 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

I was actually playing around with Auto ISO which I haven't used much
in the past and found I had taken a number of shots at ISO 12800. The
following are unadjusted JPGs of the original raw files. There is no
rhyme or reason to the aperture and speed settings.

What were your actual Auto ISO settings?
Obviously your Maximum Sensitivety was ISO 12800, but what was your
Minimum Shutter speed, and what was your thinking behind that choice?
It looks like it might have been 1/10 sec.

Here is the sun setting behind the hills encircling the town of
Whitianga, Mercury Bay where Captain Cook stopped to make a number of
observations of the planet Mercury. f/4 at 1/400 sec.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501956.jpg

That seems reasonably to be a well balanced exposure.
How did you meter the manual exposure, and why did you select those
particular manual A & S settings?

Also, I would have thought that by shooting Auto ISO with Manual you
would have the camera working to balance the exposure by Auto adjusting
the ISO.


This one is a friend watching the television broadcast of Serena
Williams being demolished by Angelique Kerber in the Australian open.
f/4 at 1/400 sec
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501958.jpg

Same question for this image as the last regarding choice of Manual A &
S exposure settings and metering?

Here one can see the Auto ISO making the sensitivety adjustment to deal
with the manual A & S settings. That said it did a good job and kept
the noise down. Nice.


Finally we are in the bowels of a 19th century gold-ore stamper in the
town of Thames. f/8 at 1/10 sec.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501973.jpg

Here you switched from Manual to Aperture Priority and your Auto ISO
Minimum Shutter Speed setting came into play, and while allowing you to
capture the scene, the shutter speed was too low and combined with the
Maximum Sensitivety, you now have areas where highlights are blown.




--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Tue, 2 Feb 2016 18:00:31 -0800, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2016-02-03 01:02:26 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

I was actually playing around with Auto ISO which I haven't used much
in the past and found I had taken a number of shots at ISO 12800. The
following are unadjusted JPGs of the original raw files. There is no
rhyme or reason to the aperture and speed settings.

What were your actual Auto ISO settings?
Obviously your Maximum Sensitivety was ISO 12800, but what was your
Minimum Shutter speed, and what was your thinking behind that choice?
It looks like it might have been 1/10 sec.

Actually it was 'Auto'.

Here is the sun setting behind the hills encircling the town of
Whitianga, Mercury Bay where Captain Cook stopped to make a number of
observations of the planet Mercury. f/4 at 1/400 sec.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501956.jpg

That seems reasonably to be a well balanced exposure.
How did you meter the manual exposure, and why did you select those
particular manual A & S settings?

Right now, I haven't the least idea.

Also, I would have thought that by shooting Auto ISO with Manual you
would have the camera working to balance the exposure by Auto adjusting
the ISO.

So would I.


This one is a friend watching the television broadcast of Serena
Williams being demolished by Angelique Kerber in the Australian open.
f/4 at 1/400 sec
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501958.jpg

Same question for this image as the last regarding choice of Manual A &
S exposure settings and metering?

It was an opportunity shot: I hadn't intended to take one but for a
few seconds he dropped his hand down from his face. I just used the
settings which were already in the camera.

Here one can see the Auto ISO making the sensitivety adjustment to deal
with the manual A & S settings. That said it did a good job and kept
the noise down. Nice.


Finally we are in the bowels of a 19th century gold-ore stamper in the
town of Thames. f/8 at 1/10 sec.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501973.jpg

Here you switched from Manual to Aperture Priority and your Auto ISO
Minimum Shutter Speed setting came into play, and while allowing you to
capture the scene, the shutter speed was too low and combined with the
Maximum Sensitivety, you now have areas where highlights are blown.

Blown highlights were inevitable. I was in a dark corner, looking out
through a forest of timbers to the light outside.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 2016-02-03 22:30:42 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

On Tue, 2 Feb 2016 18:00:31 -0800, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2016-02-03 01:02:26 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

I was actually playing around with Auto ISO which I haven't used much
in the past and found I had taken a number of shots at ISO 12800. The
following are unadjusted JPGs of the original raw files. There is no
rhyme or reason to the aperture and speed settings.

What were your actual Auto ISO settings?
Obviously your Maximum Sensitivety was ISO 12800, but what was your
Minimum Shutter speed, and what was your thinking behind that choice?
It looks like it might have been 1/10 sec.

Actually it was 'Auto'.

There is more to Auto ISO that just turning it on in the Shooting Menu.
Unless the D750 is different to other Nikon DSLRs you usually have two
parameters to set, Maximum Sensitivety and Minimum Shutter Speed.
How did you determine that the Shutter Speed was 'Auto'?


Here is the sun setting behind the hills encircling the town of
Whitianga, Mercury Bay where Captain Cook stopped to make a number of
observations of the planet Mercury. f/4 at 1/400 sec.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501956.jpg

That seems reasonably to be a well balanced exposure.
How did you meter the manual exposure, and why did you select those
particular manual A & S settings?

Right now, I haven't the least idea.

That sounds like a questionable method for conducting an experiment.


Also, I would have thought that by shooting Auto ISO with Manual you
would have the camera working to balance the exposure by Auto adjusting
the ISO.

So would I.

You did, and the Auto ISO worked, only adjusting the ISO as you had set
the shutter speed manually, giving you an appropriate ISO 5600.
However, now we know that your metering and logic for selection of the
manual A & S settings was at best vague. So vague in fact that you
don't recall your reasoning for making those settings.


This one is a friend watching the television broadcast of Serena
Williams being demolished by Angelique Kerber in the Australian open.
f/4 at 1/400 sec
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501958.jpg

Same question for this image as the last regarding choice of Manual A &
S exposure settings and metering?

It was an opportunity shot: I hadn't intended to take one but for a
few seconds he dropped his hand down from his face. I just used the
settings which were already in the camera.

So, we have a repeat of manual A & S settings of dubious origins, and
you lucked out. This time with the Auto ISO pushing it to the Max with
ISO 12800 together with the random manual settings.
Definitely not a valid experiment.

Here one can see the Auto ISO making the sensitivety adjustment to deal
with the manual A & S settings. That said it did a good job and kept
the noise down. Nice.


Finally we are in the bowels of a 19th century gold-ore stamper in the
town of Thames. f/8 at 1/10 sec.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501973.jpg

Here you switched from Manual to Aperture Priority and your Auto ISO
Minimum Shutter Speed setting came into play, and while allowing you to
capture the scene, the shutter speed was too low and combined with the
Maximum Sensitivety, you now have areas where highlights are blown.

Blown highlights were inevitable.

Not necessarily.

I was in a dark corner, looking out
through a forest of timbers to the light outside.

Here I would have set a higher Minimum Shutter speed in the Auto ISO
parameters, perhaps 1/100-1/80sec vs 1/10.
Then you could have shot several Aperture Priority shots with different
settings, or even a bracket set with a variety of EV values. I believe
that would have given you a far better exposed image.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 15:02:47 -0800, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2016-02-03 22:30:42 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

On Tue, 2 Feb 2016 18:00:31 -0800, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2016-02-03 01:02:26 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

I was actually playing around with Auto ISO which I haven't used much
in the past and found I had taken a number of shots at ISO 12800. The
following are unadjusted JPGs of the original raw files. There is no
rhyme or reason to the aperture and speed settings.

What were your actual Auto ISO settings?
Obviously your Maximum Sensitivety was ISO 12800, but what was your
Minimum Shutter speed, and what was your thinking behind that choice?
It looks like it might have been 1/10 sec.

Actually it was 'Auto'.

There is more to Auto ISO that just turning it on in the Shooting Menu.
Unless the D750 is different to other Nikon DSLRs you usually have two
parameters to set, Maximum Sensitivety and Minimum Shutter Speed.
How did you determine that the Shutter Speed was 'Auto'?

I read it from the menu window.


Here is the sun setting behind the hills encircling the town of
Whitianga, Mercury Bay where Captain Cook stopped to make a number of
observations of the planet Mercury. f/4 at 1/400 sec.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501956.jpg

That seems reasonably to be a well balanced exposure.
How did you meter the manual exposure, and why did you select those
particular manual A & S settings?

Right now, I haven't the least idea.

That sounds like a questionable method for conducting an experiment.

There was nothing formal: just a table of random numbers and we will
see what we have got afterwards. Rather like interviewing people in
the street: you don't try interviewing them in order of opinion. In
this case, I was mainly interested in noise at high ISO and wasn't
much concerned about anything else.

Anyway, here it is after 30 secs in Lightroom
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...2--7501956.jpg


Also, I would have thought that by shooting Auto ISO with Manual you
would have the camera working to balance the exposure by Auto adjusting
the ISO.

So would I.

You did, and the Auto ISO worked, only adjusting the ISO as you had set
the shutter speed manually, giving you an appropriate ISO 5600.
However, now we know that your metering and logic for selection of the
manual A & S settings was at best vague. So vague in fact that you
don't recall your reasoning for making those settings.

So? See above.


This one is a friend watching the television broadcast of Serena
Williams being demolished by Angelique Kerber in the Australian open.
f/4 at 1/400 sec
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501958.jpg

Same question for this image as the last regarding choice of Manual A &
S exposure settings and metering?

It was an opportunity shot: I hadn't intended to take one but for a
few seconds he dropped his hand down from his face. I just used the
settings which were already in the camera.

So, we have a repeat of manual A & S settings of dubious origins, and
you lucked out. This time with the Auto ISO pushing it to the Max with
ISO 12800 together with the random manual settings.
Definitely not a valid experiment.

Of course it is. Now I know what it does under those particular
circumstances.

Anyway, here it is after 30 secs in Lightroom
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...2--7501958.jpg

Here one can see the Auto ISO making the sensitivety adjustment to deal
with the manual A & S settings. That said it did a good job and kept
the noise down. Nice.


Finally we are in the bowels of a 19th century gold-ore stamper in the
town of Thames. f/8 at 1/10 sec.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501973.jpg

Here you switched from Manual to Aperture Priority and your Auto ISO
Minimum Shutter Speed setting came into play, and while allowing you to
capture the scene, the shutter speed was too low and combined with the
Maximum Sensitivety, you now have areas where highlights are blown.

Blown highlights were inevitable.

Not necessarily.

I was in a dark corner, looking out
through a forest of timbers to the light outside.

Here I would have set a higher Minimum Shutter speed in the Auto ISO
parameters, perhaps 1/100-1/80sec vs 1/10.

Why would you use 1/100-1/80 sec? You can only know that this might
make sense if you already know how the camera behaves.

Then you could have shot several Aperture Priority shots with different
settings, or even a bracket set with a variety of EV values. I believe
that would have given you a far better exposed image.

I do intend to use bracket shots but they are scheduled for the
future. Right now, I have a much better idea than I did about how the
camera behaves at high ISO.

Anyway, here it is after 30 secs in Lightroom
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...2--7501973.jpg
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 2016-02-04 01:13:21 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 15:02:47 -0800, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2016-02-03 22:30:42 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

On Tue, 2 Feb 2016 18:00:31 -0800, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2016-02-03 01:02:26 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

I was actually playing around with Auto ISO which I haven't used much
in the past and found I had taken a number of shots at ISO 12800. The
following are unadjusted JPGs of the original raw files. There is no
rhyme or reason to the aperture and speed settings.

What were your actual Auto ISO settings?
Obviously your Maximum Sensitivety was ISO 12800, but what was your
Minimum Shutter speed, and what was your thinking behind that choice?
It looks like it might have been 1/10 sec.

Actually it was 'Auto'.

There is more to Auto ISO that just turning it on in the Shooting Menu.
Unless the D750 is different to other Nikon DSLRs you usually have two
parameters to set, Maximum Sensitivety and Minimum Shutter Speed.
How did you determine that the Shutter Speed was 'Auto'?

I read it from the menu window.

OK! So that I can understand I have checked with the D750 User Manual,
and I can see that Nikon is using a different aproach to Auto ISO whith
the D750, and there is indeed and *Auto* setting for the Minimum
Shutter speed, and if that is selected the minimum shutter speed is
based on the focal length of the lens.

That does not preclude you from making your own selection. I would
suggest considering something other than *Auto* for the Auto ISO
Minimum Shutter Speed setting.



Here is the sun setting behind the hills encircling the town of
Whitianga, Mercury Bay where Captain Cook stopped to make a number of
observations of the planet Mercury. f/4 at 1/400 sec.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501956.jpg

That seems reasonably to be a well balanced exposure.
How did you meter the manual exposure, and why did you select those
particular manual A & S settings?

Right now, I haven't the least idea.

That sounds like a questionable method for conducting an experiment.

There was nothing formal: just a table of random numbers and we will
see what we have got afterwards. Rather like interviewing people in
the street: you don't try interviewing them in order of opinion. In
this case, I was mainly interested in noise at high ISO and wasn't
much concerned about anything else.

From the NR point of view it performed quite well. Did you have the
High ISO NR turned on in-camera?

Anyway, here it is after 30 secs in Lightroom
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...2--7501956.jpg

There is something about that rendition which makes me think of over
cooked NR. I am thinking particularly of the smoothing and loss of
detail in the shadows.



Also, I would have thought that by shooting Auto ISO with Manual you
would have the camera working to balance the exposure by Auto adjusting
the ISO.

So would I.

You did, and the Auto ISO worked, only adjusting the ISO as you had set
the shutter speed manually, giving you an appropriate ISO 5600.
However, now we know that your metering and logic for selection of the
manual A & S settings was at best vague. So vague in fact that you
don't recall your reasoning for making those settings.

So? See above.

So you did guess at manual A = f/4 and manual S = 1/400sec.


This one is a friend watching the television broadcast of Serena
Williams being demolished by Angelique Kerber in the Australian open.
f/4 at 1/400 sec
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501958.jpg

Same question for this image as the last regarding choice of Manual A &
S exposure settings and metering?

It was an opportunity shot: I hadn't intended to take one but for a
few seconds he dropped his hand down from his face. I just used the
settings which were already in the camera.

So, we have a repeat of manual A & S settings of dubious origins, and
you lucked out. This time with the Auto ISO pushing it to the Max with
ISO 12800 together with the random manual settings.
Definitely not a valid experiment.

Of course it is. Now I know what it does under those particular
circumstances.

....er, OK.

Anyway, here it is after 30 secs in Lightroom
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...2--7501958.jpg

With a few tweaks in the HSL panel, and a different aproach to NR got me he
https://db.tt/E2yAxYSf

Here one can see the Auto ISO making the sensitivety adjustment to deal
with the manual A & S settings. That said it did a good job and kept
the noise down. Nice.


Finally we are in the bowels of a 19th century gold-ore stamper in the
town of Thames. f/8 at 1/10 sec.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501973.jpg

Here you switched from Manual to Aperture Priority and your Auto ISO
Minimum Shutter Speed setting came into play, and while allowing you to
capture the scene, the shutter speed was too low and combined with the
Maximum Sensitivety, you now have areas where highlights are blown.

Blown highlights were inevitable.

Not necessarily.

I was in a dark corner, looking out
through a forest of timbers to the light outside.

Here I would have set a higher Minimum Shutter speed in the Auto ISO
parameters, perhaps 1/100-1/80sec vs 1/10.

Why would you use 1/100-1/80 sec? You can only know that this might
make sense if you already know how the camera behaves.

A peek at the histogram should have given you a clue that 1/10sec from
the *Auto Min Speed* selection wasn't going to work at ISO 12800.

Then you could have shot several Aperture Priority shots with different
settings, or even a bracket set with a variety of EV values. I believe
that would have given you a far better exposed image.

I do intend to use bracket shots but they are scheduled for the
future. Right now, I have a much better idea than I did about how the
camera behaves at high ISO.

Anyway, here it is after 30 secs in Lightroom
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...2--7501973.jpg

Yup! There is only so much you can do to fix highlights that badly blown.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2/2/2016 8:02 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
I was actually playing around with Auto ISO which I haven't used much
in the past and found I had taken a number of shots at ISO 12800. The
following are unadjusted JPGs of the original raw files. There is no
rhyme or reason to the aperture and speed settings.

Here is the sun setting behind the hills encircling the town of
Whitianga, Mercury Bay where Captain Cook stopped to make a number of
observations of the planet Mercury. f/4 at 1/400 sec.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501956.jpg


For my taste the sky is too bright and the shadows to deep. You can fix
this during exposure either by using a graduated ND filter, or by
jiggling your hand over the top of the image for about 75% of the
exposure. (That will reduce your exposure of the sky by about 1.5 stops.)

This one is a friend watching the television broadcast of Serena
Williams being demolished by Angelique Kerber in the Australian open.
f/4 at 1/400 sec
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501958.jpg


If your friend is the subject, I would have eliminated the bright light,
as my eye keeps being drawn to that, rather than your friend. Also, too
much of the image seems OOF.

Finally we are in the bowels of a 19th century gold-ore stamper in the
town of Thames. f/8 at 1/10 sec.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501973.jpg

Same comments as the Duck.

--
PeterN

On 2016-02-03 02:29:38 +0000, PeterN said:

On 2/2/2016 8:02 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
I was actually playing around with Auto ISO which I haven't used much
in the past and found I had taken a number of shots at ISO 12800. The
following are unadjusted JPGs of the original raw files. There is no
rhyme or reason to the aperture and speed settings.

Here is the sun setting behind the hills encircling the town of
Whitianga, Mercury Bay where Captain Cook stopped to make a number of
observations of the planet Mercury. f/4 at 1/400 sec.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501956.jpg


For my taste the sky is too bright and the shadows to deep. You can fix
this during exposure either by using a graduated ND filter, or by
jiggling your hand over the top of the image for about 75% of the
exposure. (That will reduce your exposure of the sky by about 1.5
stops.)

How are you timing this "hand jiggling" for 75% of 1/400 sec?

The ND Grad is a workable option, but the question remains where and
how was metering made (what area was the metering target)?
....and why the A & S manual settings selected, one would hope they were
not random guesses.


This one is a friend watching the television broadcast of Serena
Williams being demolished by Angelique Kerber in the Australian open.
f/4 at 1/400 sec
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501958.jpg


If your friend is the subject, I would have eliminated the bright
light, as my eye keeps being drawn to that, rather than your friend.
Also, too much of the image seems OOF.

It is an Auto ISO experiment.

Finally we are in the bowels of a 19th century gold-ore stamper in the
town of Thames. f/8 at 1/10 sec.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501973.jpg

Same comments as the Duck.

Aah! Some concensus.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2/2/2016 9:43 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2016-02-03 02:29:38 +0000, PeterN said:

On 2/2/2016 8:02 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
I was actually playing around with Auto ISO which I haven't used much
in the past and found I had taken a number of shots at ISO 12800. The
following are unadjusted JPGs of the original raw files. There is no
rhyme or reason to the aperture and speed settings.

Here is the sun setting behind the hills encircling the town of
Whitianga, Mercury Bay where Captain Cook stopped to make a number of
observations of the planet Mercury. f/4 at 1/400 sec.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501956.jpg


For my taste the sky is too bright and the shadows to deep. You can
fix this during exposure either by using a graduated ND filter, or by
jiggling your hand over the top of the image for about 75% of the
exposure. (That will reduce your exposure of the sky by about 1.5 stops.)

How are you timing this "hand jiggling" for 75% of 1/400 sec?

I am used to working with Long exposure.


The ND Grad is a workable option, but the question remains where and how
was metering made (what area was the metering target)?
...and why the A & S manual settings selected, one would hope they were
not random guesses.


Yep!


This one is a friend watching the television broadcast of Serena
Williams being demolished by Angelique Kerber in the Australian open.
f/4 at 1/400 sec
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501958.jpg


If your friend is the subject, I would have eliminated the bright
light, as my eye keeps being drawn to that, rather than your friend.
Also, too much of the image seems OOF.

It is an Auto ISO experiment.

Unless he was using some form of center weighted or spot metering, I
would think that the light will throw matrix metering out of whack.


Finally we are in the bowels of a 19th century gold-ore stamper in the
town of Thames. f/8 at 1/10 sec.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501973.jpg

Same comments as the Duck.

Aah! Some concensus.


Anything to make you happy.

--
PeterN

On 2016-02-03 03:05:02 +0000, PeterN said:

On 2/2/2016 9:43 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2016-02-03 02:29:38 +0000, PeterN said:

On 2/2/2016 8:02 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
I was actually playing around with Auto ISO which I haven't used much
in the past and found I had taken a number of shots at ISO 12800. The
following are unadjusted JPGs of the original raw files. There is no
rhyme or reason to the aperture and speed settings.

Here is the sun setting behind the hills encircling the town of
Whitianga, Mercury Bay where Captain Cook stopped to make a number of
observations of the planet Mercury. f/4 at 1/400 sec.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501956.jpg


For my taste the sky is too bright and the shadows to deep. You can
fix this during exposure either by using a graduated ND filter, or by
jiggling your hand over the top of the image for about 75% of the
exposure. (That will reduce your exposure of the sky by about 1.5 stops.)

How are you timing this "hand jiggling" for 75% of 1/400 sec?

I am used to working with Long exposure.

How do you get to "long exposure" from a shutter speed of 1/400 sec?

Let's see 75% of 1/400 should be 1/300. Do you use an analog, or
electronically timed 1/300 sec "hand jiggle"?

The ND Grad is a workable option, but the question remains where and how
was metering made (what area was the metering target)?
...and why the A & S manual settings selected, one would hope they were
not random guesses.


Yep!


This one is a friend watching the television broadcast of Serena
Williams being demolished by Angelique Kerber in the Australian open.
f/4 at 1/400 sec
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501958.jpg


If your friend is the subject, I would have eliminated the bright
light, as my eye keeps being drawn to that, rather than your friend.
Also, too much of the image seems OOF.

It is an Auto ISO experiment.

Unless he was using some form of center weighted or spot metering, I
would think that the light will throw matrix metering out of whack.

....but we don't know yet do we?


Finally we are in the bowels of a 19th century gold-ore stamper in the
town of Thames. f/8 at 1/10 sec.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7501973.jpg

Same comments as the Duck.

Aah! Some concensus.


Anything to make you happy.

Almost there ;-)


--
Regards,

Savageduck