Alexandra wrote: 
This is what we call a "Ranch" problem. Rancher Bob has a 100 acre ranch with 20 cows per acre. Rancher Tom has a 50 acre ranch with 50 cows per acre. You have 96 cows per acre. Who has more cows?

 Alexandra wrote: 
96 is for viewing on the innertubes. if printed, it will be pixelated or blurry when printed.
ask the person who did it to resize from the original for 300 dpi.I hope her original is 300 or better.

My cover art has been sent.
 
The image is at 96 dpi. I must submit it at 300 dpi.
 
Is this going to work? Is 96 dpi what an original image usually is?   Or does it sound like it's been sized?

 edieraye wrote: 
You're everywhere in here today! Nice to see you!

 edieraye wrote: 
RP HowTo Wiki.

 MrsHobieJoe wrote: 
Try different times of day, too.  All that haze might just work for you if the sun is at a low angle.

Experiment with composition - sometimes less is more.

 

 MrsHobieJoe wrote: 
another thing to remember is that as you zoom in on distant subjects, you are also zooming in on all the schmutz between you and your subject. i dont know what the focal length was when you shot that pic. some software along the way has stripped all the metadata from the file. 

 ScottFromWyoming wrote: 



sorry mate!!, you have to remember that this is probably closer to our home than Salt Lake City is to you

We have been talking about the photo and sprt from Andy cleaning the lens, and learning a hole load of stuff from the manual about how to work the camera we are going to hope for one of those crystal clear days for a decent shot

 MrsHobieJoe wrote: 

thank you for all your comments, I downloaded the manual onto the iPad and took it up with us. The reason i didn't reply earlier is that we drove up to the pass running next to this mountain and hopped across into Spain' for ice creams.

 ScottFromWyoming wrote: 
i might help. i dont know that it would have been enough.
 
looking at the pic, seeing white sky with no clouds, leads me to believe a lot of the problem is atmospheric. if it was a blue sky/puffy white cloud kind of day, we wouldnt be having this conversation.
 
of course, the best way to deal with conditions like this would be to shoot raw. i dont think thats an option here.

 swell_sailor wrote: 
A UV filter's probably out of the question for that model camera, but that would help the distant mountains, no?
 
edit: No, it looks like it could take a filter... 

 buzz wrote: 

Yeah. 

As you know buzz, this is a workaround technique that allows the photographer to easily adjust the exposure by small amounts for tricky scenes like this, while keeping the camera in auto mode. I think the exposure below is pretty good really. Not much more you could do to get it right but use a graduated neutral density filter or shoot at a different time of day, or both. The highlights look to be intact and the foreground has plenty of information. I like it. 

 swell_sailor wrote: 
yes
 
it was 2 am when i was looking this stuff up for HJ. it was way too late to go into any in-depth discussion of exposure techniques. i was kind of hoping he could figure some of this out after reading selections from the manual.

 hobiejoe wrote: 

Sometimes if it's an exposure problem you can fool the camera by, for example, pointing it a little lower into the darker area, partially depressing the shutter button to achieve exposure and focus lock, then lifting the camera to the composition you want (while continuing with the shutter button partially depressed) then gently depress the shutter button completely to take the shot. Metering the darker part of the scene this way fools the camera into thinking the entire scene is darker, so it allows more light in resulting in a brighter exposure. You can also lift the camera a bit, metering more of the bright sky, in order to achieve a darker overall exposure. It only takes a small amount of movement in a scene like this to make the camera think the overall scene is darker or brighter and adjust for it when creating it's exposure values. It's important to remember when using this little trick that these cameras typically lock both exposure and focus, so when you move the camera in this way you want to make sure it's still pointing at something at approximately the same distance so that it doesn't focus incorrectly. In this scene most of what you see is at infinity, so there's little risk of missing focus. 

When you use this technique, remember where you pointed for metering, review your photo, then adjust where you meter accordingly for the next shot until you get what you want.

The dynamic range of the scene you are shooting is challenging for any camera. If we darken it a bit for the sky we'll lose detail in the foreground. Plus you have haze. The photo you have there is really close to what you'd want to start with going into photoshop. I'd be happy to grab it and do two small tweaks to demonstrate if that's okay with you. 

 buzz wrote: 
yes, and the inadaquacy of the photographer, now chuckling over the special buttons for photographine dogs or cats!!

 hobiejoe wrote: 
the distance to the mountain and the atmospheric conditions in between will play a big part in pics like that.

 buzz wrote: 
thank you, you are very kind, will see if I can post an imroved version later!

 hobiejoe wrote: 
manual 
 
i took a real quick look.

check out page 17 on focus, 24 pro low light, 25 for scene position, and 32 for auto focus/auto exposure lock.
 
that may help you get through vacation. 
 
trial and error. your not paying for film. 

 buzz wrote: 
odn't wear yourself out looking for me at this time of night buzz- you should be asleep and I will see if I can download one to peruse over the day (I am on holiday, you are working)