Can't post this one directly, it's too darn big, and it just does not translate to small size well at all.
This was taken on 09/30/2005 with the Canon 5D and canon 24/1.4L at f/2.8. it is nearly the full frame, but is cropped slightly to get rid of some coma on the far corners. It is a 360-second exposure, using a tracking mount, in this case an EQ-5 equatorial mount.
I too use a circular polariser, in the right conditions.
I also simply choose not to shoot when the sky is almost white or grey as I know the scene overall will have too great a dynamic range to capture. Where I've ignored this rule I've had the same problems as you have - blown out sky.
This can be somewhat mitigated by underexposing (which I do a lot too) but there's a limit to how much one can underexpose without losing the shadows and introducing too much noise.
I look for shots where the sky has colour/ interest and if it's not happening that day I pretty much exclude the sky from most of the shots I take and look for other images to capture.
Also, you control when you go where - plan your shoots to coincide with a time of day when weather and the angle of the sun collude to get you what you want.
I think I used a polarizing filter, but I'm not sure it had any affect in this case.
For this one I definitely did use a polarizing filter.
For this one I think I used a polarizing filter, but I'm not sure. Some highlights in the clouds are blown, but I don't think that it hurts the image too much in this case.
I think that if you find that your highlights are blown, you simply need to reshoot with your exposure compensation dialed down to underexpose the shot.
If the sky is overcast to your eye, you are not going to get a picture of a properly exposed ground, and not blow out the sky...it's just impossible...but you can still make it a decent photo (well, at least I think it's decent heh)...
Well. I was just there to take the picture on all of these.
Just kept taking 15-30 second exposures until lightning struck-
Stitched these together from between 3-6 shots a piece-
edit - Okay, these last one required extensive spot editing and blending on top of what photoCHop automatically did for me. The last one of the mountains took me 4 months to make me happy. Lots of spot editing, contrast mask, burning, dodging, sponge, it was a bugger.
Secret to blue skies? Make sure you have your exposure set correctly. Many point and shoot cameras do an excellent job of metering to include an appropriately exposed sky, especially if you have a special setting for "sunsets" or something like that. Any kind of spot metering is prone to overexposed skies if you accidently meter on a darker foreground element.
Fritz, one of these days i'm gunna bang on your doorstep so you can let me do one of these fabulous photographs also... they are so breathtaking!!
Originally posted by kirbic:
Can't post this one directly, it's too darn big, and it just does not translate to small size well at all.
This was taken on 09/30/2005 with the Canon 5D and canon 24/1.4L at f/2.8. it is nearly the full frame, but is cropped slightly to get rid of some coma on the far corners. It is a 360-second exposure, using a tracking mount, in this case an EQ-5 equatorial mount.
I try to meter off the brightest parts of the sky if I'm composing for a shot where the sky is the subject. If you want a dark, bold sky centerwieghting or spot metering off the light will do it, but you'll probably get a silhouette of any other subject in your composition. Matrix metering like in my park shot should give you a balanced expiosure if you meter into the sky... anyway just take a zillion shots at different readings and see what works for you and your camera. Didn't use a polorizer
EDIT: I couldn't scroll down after I started my response, but now I see you don't have an SLR. You can get a Cokin system for any camera, it attaches via the tripod mount at the bottom of the camera. You may be able to use the "A" system filters, which are smaller and cheaper too!
