He's right Marnie, I played around a lot last night shooting a scene as RAW then as JPG. The RAW looks like crap until you "process" it, then it meets or (usually) exceeds the quality of the JPG. All depended on my ability to use the RAW convertor. The trick of holding down the ALT key while working on exposure and shadows I've found to be essential for me.
Paul's not only steady, but smart too! Is he on the official PDML "I hate you" list yet? ;-) Don > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2005 5:55 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Speaking of exposure.... > > > Yes. It's deliberate and correct. Your camera should expose for the > highlights. > Paul > On May 20, 2005, at 11:54 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > I am not sure I've followed everything in this discussion, but on the > > whole > > my RAW files usually look slightly or more than slightly underexposed. > > Doesn't > > bother me because it means I have more to work with. Easier to lighten > > than > > darken. Hard to correct blown highlights. (The exception is when I > > shoot backlit > > subjects, but I am going to have to use exposure compensation more, > > which I > > haven't been.) > > > > Have people been saying this type of behavior, underexposed look, is > > sort of > > deliberate? > > > > Marnie aka Doe > > >
