Last Light At Point Mugu [Contest Winner Pool June 2006 ]
Uploaded: June 25, 2006 22:56:31
Canon 10D, 17-40L lens, Cokin 2 stop grad ND filter to prevent overexposure of the sky, Manfrotto tripod. 1/3 second at f22
Janine Russell
June 25, 2006
Kerby Pfrangle June 26, 2006
Great depth of field, warm light and beautiful vista. Lovely. #2950545Leanne M.E. Boyd June 26, 2006
Beautiful scene, Dennis! #2950611Sharon Day June 26, 2006
Awesome image, Dennis!!! #2954768Daniel G. Flocke July 25, 2006
Dennis - Congratulations on your Finalist!!! Good luck next round!~Daniel #3075332
Jill Battaglia July 25, 2006
Awesome image Dennis! Congrats! #3076176Leanne M.E. Boyd July 25, 2006
Congratulations Dennis! #3077026Donna La Mattino Pagakis July 26, 2006
Nicely captured scenic, congratulations! #3081965Husain Akhtar July 27, 2006
Warm congratulations! #3089561Donna Dunbar August 02, 2006
I used to live at Point Mugu,it had some amazing sunsets, you have captured this gorgeous sceen perfectly.Congrats !!!! #3113695DENNIS A. CHAMBERLAIN August 02, 2006
I want to thank everyone for your kind comments on my photo. Matthew, unlike the solid neutral density filter, only the top half of the graduated neutral density filter is dark. Therefore, the exposure of only the sky portion of the shot is being held back from being overexposed. Without the filter, you would see a proper exposure of the forground, but the sky would be way overexposed. In a situation like this, where there is a large difference in the amount of light in the sky compared to the forground, you cannot capture a proper exposure on both without bringing the exposure of the sky down. The exposure difference is too great. It looks fine to the human eye because our eyes can see much greater detail in highlights and shadow. Film (or the digital sensor in this case) is very limited in the detail in which it can see compared to the human eye. Therefore, we must help the camera to see more like we see with the grad ND filter. #3115319Kathleen Miller August 02, 2006
This is beautiful. What was your iso for this shot? #3115395DENNIS A. CHAMBERLAIN August 02, 2006
Thanks Kathleen. The ISO was 100. #3115405Kathleen Miller August 02, 2006
Thanks Dennis. #3115532Donna La Mattino Pagakis August 21, 2006
Gorgeous Dennis, congrats! #3196527Sign up for an interactive online photography course to get critiques on your photos.
Discussions by Category: You can view photo discussions on various themes in the Community > Photo Discussions section of the site.
BetterPhoto Websites: If you see an orange website link directly under the photographer's name, it's totally okay. It's not spam. The reason: BetterPhoto is the one that offers these personal photography websites. We are supporting our clients with those links.
Unavailable EXIF: If there is no other information but 'Unavailable' in the EXIF (meaning no EXIF data exists with the photo), the 'Unavailable' blurb is not displayed. If there is any info, it shows. Many photos have the EXIF stripped out when people modify the image and resave it, before uploading.
The following truth is one of the core philosophies of BetterPhoto:
I hear, I forget.
I see, I remember.
I do, I understand.
You learn by doing. Take your next online photography class.
Copyright for this photo belongs solely to DENNIS A. CHAMBERLAIN.
Images may not be copied, downloaded, or used in any way without the expressed, written permission of the photographer.
Log in to follow or message this photographer or report this photo.
I already have an account!