1. Welcome to NikonCafe.com—a friendly Nikon camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

Croatia 2008 - Part 1

Discussion in 'Wanderlust and Travel' started by Perreault, Sep 29, 2008.

  1. Perreault


    Nov 24, 2006

    A few weeks ago, I posted some photos from the Venice part of our summer trip: https://www.nikoncafe.com/vforums/showthread.php?t=188499

    Here is the second part of this trip, 2 weeks in Croatia. From Pula to Dubrovnik. We loved this part of the world.


    Please do not hesitate to comment or critic.

    1 Amphitheater in Pula

    2 Boy in church

    3 My wife and kids

    4 Sign

    5 Porec

    6 Bells

    7 Amphitheater in Pula 2

    8 Boats

    9 Adriatic coast

    10 Waterfalls in Plitvice Lake

    11 Trees in Plitvice Lake

    12 Waterfalls in Skradin

    13 Plitvice Lakes

    14 Alley

    15 Delivery scooter

    16 Clock tower

    17 Market in Split 1

    18 Market in Split 2

    19 Market in Split 3

    20 Market in Split 4
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 15, 2017
  2. Hey Yves,
    Nice going... I love to visit places like this.
    Great shots and thanks for sharing.:wink:
  3. sonique128

    sonique128 Guest

    The shot of the trees under the clear blue water is fantastic!!
  4. Beautiful Country

    Beautiful Country, I would have loved to see the Exif data from your shots in order to know why some look a bit overexposed.

    Croatia is a very nice place - why did you pick Croatia to visit?
  5. Perreault


    Nov 24, 2006
    Thanks for the comments

    Thanks for taking the time to comment!

    Dude: Which one do you find overexposed? We heard and read about Croatia and everbody who went loved it. We decided to go to meet a friend in Dubrovnik. She studied in Toronto with my wife and went back to Croatia. It is a very nice place and easily done with Venice.
  6. whyhan


    Jun 14, 2006
    SF Bay Area
    Yves, maybe you should number your pics. It'll be easier to comment them.
    First pic is definitely over-exposed.
    Nonetheless, excellent composition for all.
  7. Perreault


    Nov 24, 2006

    I numbered and made a short description of every photo. It will be easier if you want to comment.

  8. I never thought of visiting Croatia and Venice at the same time but yes that makes sense. Looks like I'll have no excuse not to go next year.

    About the over exposure, I noticed you have a D300 and picture number 1, 6, 13, 18 are a bit overexposed - what I now do - started this with a D300 - is shoot at 14 bits and I do tend to underexpose of nail it - depends what I want to highlight in the picture - by forcing the exposure down I keep my blue skies blue and avoid blown highlights. I it easier to bring back details in the shadows and dark areas in post processing for me than it is to try to recover blown highlights or washed out colors.

    Are you located in Montreal or Toronto? (I am coming down to Montreal for a small photo shoot this weekend.)
  9. Perreault


    Nov 24, 2006

    Thanks for the explanation. I will try to shoot at 14 bits to see the difference.

    So you say you try to underexpose a little. What about 'expose to the right'? I read (Michael Reichman of Luminous Landscape) that there is more information in the light parts of an image than in the dark ones, so it should be easier to get back details from the light parts? Just learning and trying to get bette.

    Ferry from Venice to Croatia (Pula in Istria, the north of the Adriatic coast of Croatia) is only 2.5 hours, then we rented the car in Pula.

    I'm near Montreal (Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu).
  10. Expose to the right? ... Yea I tried to wrap my head around this one, I should do it actually and learn still something new - I just expose right and look at the picture on the LCD screen and adjust if and when necessary - experience plays a part in it as well. I do not chimp as much as I used to, I used to look at every images now for some situations I know I got the shot.

    When I say I under expose - I force down the exposure as calculated by the camera in aperture priority mode using the EV compensation - i.e.. I know that if I want to shoot at f/1.4 in bright daylight I will need to force down the exposure a bit or I will get blown highlights and washed out colors and you can't get back details in blown highlights (You probably could but I wouldn't know how to...)

    When I am not sure I chimp, look at the LCD screen and adjust - I do not look at the history gram to expose to the right. I find it easier in daylight to bring back details in the shadows using CS3 (and camera RAW in CS3) however at night in high iso situation I will then overexposed cause I need those details to be as clear as can be and yes... details in the shadows will be lost in underexposed.

    It really depends on the situation and what is important for me to capture in that given situation or frame - I may force up or down the exposure depending on what I want to achieve, i.e. to get a faster shutter speed even in low light I may force down the exposure when needed depending on what I want to capture.

    My process has been trial and error, trial and error and looking at pictures on this site has helped a lot.

    Metering is important as well - 12 bits vs. 14 bits does not matter so much as proper metering for the look you are after in your pictures. I used to shoot everything in either Matrix Metering (For everything but concerts) or Spot Metering (for concerts) not I use average center weighted metering for almost everything.

    I do find that I can bring back more details in a picture shooting 14 bits as opposed to 12 bits but these past couple of weeks I switched back to Jpegs + RAW when shooting and I have found myself using the Jpeg files from the D3 with great success - hey I'll try anything to speed up my work flow.

    There are so many variable in achieving a good pictures - for me the main ones are aperture, exposure compensation and metering (then there is the pesky composition aspect of it all... :wink:) 

    Of course there are more info in the light part of an image but if they are blown and too bright then... you lose information as well, i.e. expose an image too long and all is white... expose not enough and all is dark... A catch 22 situation that's why I say I expose right as opposed to exposing to the right and I adjust accordingly. Like if I want a stain glass window in a church I'll have to force the exposure down and lose some of the interior details of the church in order to get the details of the stain glass and vice versa (just to give you an example)

    Thank you for the info - to get to Croatia - it is just a short ride! That's pretty cool actually.

    I will be in Montreal this Saturday and Sunday and then back to Montreal on Thursday let me know if you will be coming down to the city and we could go for coffee - I do have a small photo shoot and concert to attend on Sunday and will be going for lunch at a Greek restaurant on Prince Arthur between all of this.

    Small world - I lived in St-Jean sur Richelieu a few years back and went to School across the River in Iberville for 3 years, "Les Frères maristes" you know... Marcellin Champagnat - That was ages ago!
  11. shtarka1


    Feb 1, 2008
    Fantastic Series!
  12. Perreault


    Nov 24, 2006
    Thanks Dude for the discussion. Expose right makes a lot of sense.

    It's true, le monde est petit.

    I would have liked to go have coffee and discuss photography but I'm on call this weekend, so, maybe another time.

    Thanks Steve!

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.