What happened? Please help.

[Mike Buckley]

I thought about exposure comp right away, but she said the first shot (indoors) was correctly exposed.

She could have accidentally changed any number of settings between the shots taken indoors and outdoors that would affect the exposure.

 

[Palouse]

She could have accidentally changed any number of settings between the shots taken indoors and outdoors that would affect the exposure.

Yup, I agree.

 

[Mitchell]

I thought about exposure comp right away, but she said the first shot (indoors) was correctly exposed. I'm sure shooting through a screen window has some affect.

A lot can happen when you go from indoors to outdoors to shoot.

 

[Palouse]

A lot can happen when you go from indoors to outdoors to shoot.

A lot can happen when shooting in P mode!

 

[Mike Buckley]

It's also possible that the camera was not set to P mode even though Melissa understandably thought it was. I can't tell you how many times my mode dial had been accidentally moved without me realizing it until I noticed the wonky exposure settings.

 

[Palouse]

It's also possible that the camera was not set to P mode even though Melissa understandably thought it was. I can't tell you how many times my mode dial had been accidentally moved without me realizing it until I noticed the wonky exposure settings.

Thom says,

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

So what mode could she have been in? M or P, since both A and S have, apparently, changed between her 2 shots. ISO stayed constant.

 

[frdjohns]

Uhm, unless I'm reading this wrong, her posted settings show 1/20th of a second shutter speed. That seems like an awful long exposure for outdoors in daylight. I would expect to see an overexposed image.

 

[Palouse]

She could have taken a properly exposed inside shot at those settings, accidentally hit AE-Lock (thinking it was BBF?) and shot the outside scene.

 

[Catz]

It is possible to have exposure settings that work indoors, but not outside. If you post the exposure settings from the image we can be of more help. I experienced a similar issue with one of my lenses when the aperture blades got sticky and wouldn't close fast enough.

Here are the settings I got from Photoshop:

Post #1.

The one that is the bright picture goes with the settings that is named Exposure 1

 

[Catz]

In Matrix metering, the location of the focus point can greatly affect your exposure reading. That could be why the white words are white.
Also, looks like it was shot through a window screen—that would throw off the exposure reading.

It was shot outside at a rest stop. Plus what is so strange is I took pictures this summer on vacation using the Nikon 80-400 outside and I did not get one picture that looked over exposed and the camera was in P mode. I had the same issue with my D3s but not my D2x so I don't know what the issue can be but I'm frustrated.

 

[dburanich]

Here are the settings I got from Photoshop:


The one that is the bright picture goes with the settings that is named Exposure 1

The best thing you can do is post the actual photo so we can see the EXIF?
This is what Mitch suggested in Post #5.

 

[Mike Buckley]

I'm frustrated

Do you realize the number of times it has been recommended that you post the photo so people can help you out? This is now the fifth post making that recommendation. Yet you don't even respond to those suggestions.

 

[bsinc1962]

1/20 at f22
It looks like the camera was trying to use the aperture to darken the photo instead of increasing the shutter speed.

Definitely need to see the exif data.

 

[gchappel]

2 full pages of guessing. This could be answered in one statement if we actually had the data we have been asking for.
I'm frustrated.
I am also done here, until the image is properly posted with the data I need to quit guessing.
gary

 

[Palouse]

I'm done too. Bye bye.

 

[Catz]

Do you realize the number of times it has been recommended that you post the photo so people can help you out? This is now the fifth post making that recommendation. Yet you don't even respond to those suggestions.

I did. I posted both of them. The one that I took indoors and the one I took outside of my daughter. forget the one that I took outside at the rest stop. I also posted the two pictures of the settings of my daughter. One was from outside and the other from inside the house. The one named Exposure 2 goes with picture one and the one named exposure one goes with picture two.

Here theyare again.

 

[Phil K]

ISO fixed at 320?

 

[Growltiger]

You did not post the photos before, now you have posted them they can be analysed.
As you say, the photo Exposure 2 relates to the first photo (0067) and exposure 1 relates to the second photo (0068).

I think the most likely reason for the problem is that the actual aperture in the lens is not changing so it is always working at f/1.4.
Looking at the EXIF data, there is no exposure adjustment on either photo, so that is not the explanation.
Photo 0067 is set for f/2.2 and there is slight overexposure, perhaps 1 stop.
Photo 0068 is set for f/6.3 and has much more overexposure perhaps 4+ stops.
These overexposures correspond to the difference between the intended aperture and an actual aperture of f/1.4.

There is a very easy way to tell if this is the problem. Do the following and tell us what you see.

1. Set the mode to M, manual.
2. Set the aperture to f/16.
3. Set the shutter speed to one second.
4. Now aim the camera at your eyes and take a photo while looking directly into the lens, very close to you, with good light falling into the lens. Use a flashlight if you need to. You should see the lens stop down and then open up again a second later. If it doesn't stop down then either the lens is faulty or that camera is faulty and is failing to make the lens stop down.
5. You can try the same test with that same lens on another camera to find out which is faulty, the lens or the camera.

Let us know the results of this test.

 

[Mike Buckley]

I'm wondering if the camera's meter is working accurately. The overly bright photo, which was captured outdoors, was captured using exposure settings that are six stops greater than the other photo. Assuming the light outdoors was brighter or the same as the indoor light, that's really wonky.

EDIT: As Richard pointed out in the next message, I got the exposure settings confused. The overly bright photo was captured at settings using six stops fewer than the other photo, not six stops greater.

 

[Growltiger]

I'm wondering if the camera's meter is working accurately. The overly bright photo, which was captured outdoors, was captured using exposure settings that are six stops greater than the other photo. Assuming the light outdoors was brighter or the same as the indoor light, that's really wonky.

You have it the wrong way round. To quote what I pointed out "As you say, the photo Exposure 2 relates to the first photo (0067) and exposure 1 relates to the second photo (0068)."
In addition the second exposure is placed to the left of the first exposure...
This is confusing...
The outdoor picture, 0068, was metered 6 stops brighter, 1/160, f/6.3. (I checked the EXIF).