Yes, I'm at work - its Internet Explorer 7 on a work network. I admit I havn't tried it at home on Opera 11. Is there a link in the text of the question of the OP?

Guess I'd better get on and do some work instead!

I agree that this setting might be the cause. I have a K7 and a remote control unit but have had no problems with the remote control - I love the fact we can shoot from in front or behind the camera!

But the camera has to be set to either : 1) focus first (with shutter button or manually) and shoot with one press of the remote, or 2) first press of the remote to focus then a 2nd press to take the shot. This is controlled by Custom Setting menu item 16. The default is condition 1) as above. So you might not be actually focusing on the subject at all (as fatspider was wondering above).

I have found it easier to operate as per condition 2) - then you can press the remote to prefocus without having to touch the camera, and fine tune with manual if available on the lense. Live View would make sense for this situation also, as your preview is bigger and the mirror will be up before shooting.

Roger, I'm afraid I can't see your image (I think its a browser issue), but I have seen this before, and I think it is because the selection is too harsh.

Try this - once the area is selected with the quick selection tool, look for the small rectangular button on the 'toolbar', (just above the image window and below the menus) 'Refine Edge'.

Click this and it'll open a dialogue. You use the smoothness and feather sliders to 'smooth' the transition between the selected area and non selected area. I would just try a few settings and see - maybe 2/3rds of the way up on the sliders to begin.

Also, with blown highlights, in the levels dialogue you shold be using the bottom scale and the right hand triangle, the white one, and move it away from the right edge to the left. You could also try the command 'Highlights / Shadows' - the highlights slider in this can work well to reduce blown highlights also.

I think this is a 'newbie' question, so I'll post it here. I have seen a few posts from members asking for comment on some shots. And in the thread following there are plenty of comments from others. But I can't see the photos they're talking about! They're not in the persons portfolio. How do I see these photos?

Wokinggrob just did this but I can't see the shots

Yes, if you are street shooting or taking travel shots then mostly our DSLRs can provide plenty of dynamic range - as smeggy said you can recover a number of stops from dark shadows. I wouldn't say the same of highlights though, where in digital blown highs are only acceptable in 'hotspots'.

But for professional reproduction or exhibtion sized prints I would be looking to HDR techniques to assist me. I know HDR has a bad press due to all the extreme examples we've seen, but I am attracted to it as a means to achieve true realism, to show the scene just as our eyes would interpret and adjust for the full dynamic range.

I was taken with a comment earlier when a member said that HDR and 'purist' don't go together. I will stick my neck out and claim that the opposite is the case. By 'purist' we are presumably meaning the output that any individual camera is capable of without further software processing. This surely is only 'pure' in relation to this camera.

For me a 'purist' image would be one that matches the scene that my eyes can see - and this often means a much wider DR than any individual shot can present. So by using HDR to achieve this we are in fact approaching a 'purist' result.

It was interesting to see earlier in this thread some confusion caused by the term 'Continuous', which Pentax use for an autofocus function (AF-C) and for 'Continuous Shooting', which is a drive mode setting to keep the camera firing with the shutter button held down.

Thinking about it, I don't think this term suits either function very well - in the case of autofocus, what is actually happening is that the autofocus locks on and then 'tracks' a moving object. What about calling this 'tracking' autofocus - AF-T, seems good!

And then there is this 'continuous' shooting drive mode. This allows us to fire off 'bursts' of shots, up to the limits as specified - or with the slow mode Jpegs until the card is full. Neither of these is really 'continuous' either, is it? Wouldn't this be better called 'Burst Shooting Mode'?

All fair points. I think we need to make the choice of what techniques to use based on the intended output. We don't always have to strive for the ultimate quality, although I have been snapping on holidays and later realised I had a cracker, but the DR has been blown and I'm kicking myself for not taking the time to bracket for further HDR processing.

By the way, if you're careful and you're shutter speeds remain high enough even on the longest exposure, the software is capable of ensuring even hand held bracketed shots are perfectly aligned. I tend to use the technique of holding breath to keep the camera in the same position - and also set the camera menu function for 'One-Push Bracketing' .This means that one inital press of the shutter will fire off the 3 or 5 brackets automatically, so no pressing down again each shot. The results handheld are much better aligned.

'Who shoots more then 30 frames in a single burst.....'

Not many people here it seems. This kind of functionality is traditionally offered in the highest pro spec models aimed at sports pros and papparazzi. (Am I right that there was a Canon EOS1 model with a motor drive that shot at 11fps??!!!)

I remember a few years ago when the Canon top DSLR models underwent a split - a newer model came along with lower maximum shooting speeds but higher megapixels and an upgraded sensor. This was for the landscapers and studio pros looking for the ultimate image quality. The earlier lower megapixel (but faster burst shooting) model continued to be sold alongside the newer, aimed at the press people. And I guess this is why these customers continue to flock to Canon and Nikon for these features along with the big glass.

Perhaps most forum members are used to a more sedate style of shooting (and being careful not to waste too much film), so the idea of all this bursting is a bit alarming. I admit I must have looked quite startled after my first burst experiment, panning around gleefully while my K7 rattled off shots - great fun! But I can start to see real practical benefits to this style of capture with moving subjects, and need to remind myself to set it and shoot in bursts more often.

Just an afterthought - in relation to the questions about bracketing exposures by altering ISO values (you'd expect this to occur in TAv mode - but apparently it doesn't), I can't see much argument in favour of this.

If you're considering HDR for a particular scene, then your primary concern is presumably attaining the highest quality. You're trying not to compromise the quality of the extremes of your image at the dynamic limts (in terms of visable detail, noise interferance, and a pleasing balanced contrast).

Therefore you should be aiming to use the lowest ISO value possible under the shooting conditions, namely the general brightness of the scene, the aperture and whether you are handholding or not. It seems to me the only process of bracketing with any validity would be varying the shutter speed - so I am really saying you should only shoot brackets in Av mode at a low ISO! Nigels HDR Rule 1.

Like Smeggypants I too am impressed at the inherant dynamic range of the sensors in these cameras. But there are very real limits to what even these sensors can capture of the everyday world.

This whole question of whether to shoot bracketed exposures for creating an HDR output is surely related to the subjects each individual tends to shoot.

I used to banter with a work colleague about the De Noise process - I was right into it (still am) and he never bothered. But I was out in the countryside capturing scenes with deep shadows (lower foliage often) or dark areas on water, and I always wanted a perfectly clean sky. But my colleague's thing was studio lit portraits, and he couldn't usually see enough noise to worry about. Maybe this principle applys to dynamic range also?

If the levels indicator (on the histogram) is climbing up the edge at either end, then you can't get any detail back. You can lighten the shadows for sure, but it goes a weak discoloured looking tone and of course the dreaded noise appears. If you shoot 5 brackets (making sure the shadows are well away from the left edge of the histogram in your brightest shot), then the HDR processing will reveal a purer dark tones with less noise in the shadows - overall a higher quality is attainable.

It can be well worth the time.