The more contrtasty ones look best on my screen. I'm not sure which
were subjected to auto levels. However all of them would print just
fine with a tweak in PS.
Paul
On Dec 18, 2003, at 8:59 PM, Bruce Dayton wrote:
Are you saying that the ones that look alright are the unmanipulated
ones or the
I think with the Pentax software you can only batch process the same changes
to a group of RAW images. That's the way I've done it anyway.
Christian
- Original Message -
From: tom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 19, 2003 12:57 PM
Subject: RE: Re[2]: Santa
On Fri, Dec 19, 2003 at 12:05:37PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My question still stands:
Is it better to slightly underexpose on the DSLR?
--
Best regards,
Bruce
I think so Bruce.You have a better chance to fixup an underexposed than
over,or so
i've
been told by
-Original Message-
From: Pieter Nagel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, Dec 19, 2003 at 12:05:37PM +,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My question still stands:
Is it better to slightly underexpose on the DSLR?
--
Best regards,
Bruce
I think so Bruce.You have a
Yes it is best to slightly underexpose on the DSLR. Keeps the threat of
blown out (over-exposed) highlights down. Blown out highlights
translate to no ink on paper, completely lacking in detail.
Under-exposure can usually be made to print normally with a little
correction.
Len
* There's no
-Original Message-
From: Bob Rapp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 9:18 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Re[2]: Santa Pics
What is the latitude with digital?
Bob
-Original Message-
From: tom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
He was shooting
you don't understand the assertion nor the article. they are saying the same
thing. don't overexpose in digital.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: Pieter Nagel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 19, 2003 2:34 PM
Subject: Re: Re[2]: Santa Pics
A dissenting
on 12/19/03 2:59 AM, Bruce Dayton at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My question still stands:
Is it better to slightly underexpose on the DSLR?
Well, according to what I read on Luminous Landscape (dot-com) you want to
expose to the right of the histogram, or to greater exposure side, but
without
My very unscientific opinion so far is that it's best to overexpose rather
than underexpose.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 8:59 PM
Subject: Re[2]: Santa Pics
Are you saying that
I generally over expose on purpose - I prefer the effect, and it is almost
always salvagable if something goes too wrong, but under is a whole other
story...
Bill said: My very unscientific opinion so far is that it's best to
overexpose rather than underexpose.
tan.
for print film, you have err on the side of overexposure.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: Tanya Mayer Photography [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 9:39 PM
Subject: Re: Re[2]: Santa Pics
I generally over expose on purpose - I prefer
-Original Message-
From: Tanya Mayer Photography [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I generally over expose on purpose - I prefer the effect,
and it is almost
always salvagable if something goes too wrong, but under
is a whole other
story...
He was shooting digital.
Generally it's better
What is the latitude with digital?
Bob
-Original Message-
From: tom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
He was shooting digital.
Generally it's better to underexpose if you're not sure you can nail
a bit less than color print film with normal sensors.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: Bob Rapp [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 10:17 PM
Subject: RE: Re[2]: Santa Pics
What is the latitude with digital?
14 matches
Mail list logo
