[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?
Not directly answering your question, Marnie :-) (your question being,
"have people been saying ... ?) but you might visit this site
http://www.adobe.com/digitalimag/ps_pro_primers.html
and check out the papers whose titles contain the word "Raw."
(I have them printed out and in a binder for frequent review.)
ERNR
