The left is the RAW one, the right one is the same but with a -3 EV exposure comp in RAW Converter. Obviously the right pic is unusable, but if you want you can take the upper part of right and mix it with left to have detail in all the frame. My point was: if left one were shot in jpg, it would be impossible to recover the river detail you get in the right one. If you make a sandwich of both and some post-processing, you get something like the left one, but with detail in the river part on top. And basically, to show a RAW file gets a lot of detail even if you can see it. Regards
Albano --- keithw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Albano Garcia wrote: > > > Hi gang, > > I always shoot in RAW, and appreciate the > benefits, > > but today I was surprised to find how capable is > this > > format. > > I shot this photo, the left version is the way the > > capera exposed it. If it were a JPG, no hope to > > restore detail in the upper side, and in fact I > > thought the detail was burned out, but I moved the > > esposure slider to -3 in PS CS converter and full > > detail of river was there, simply amazing (at > least > > for me): > > http://www.albanogarcia.com.ar/rawcap.jpg > > > > Regards > > > > > > Albano Garcia > > The left image is light and shows all the detail, > but there's little > contrast. Is that the RAW image? > The right hand image is so dark, if I didn't have > the left hand image to > refer to, I'd find it difficult to tell WHAT it was! > > > Hmmm. > > keith > > Albano Garcia Photography & Graphic Design http://www.albanogarcia.com.ar http://www.flaneur.albanogarcia.com.ar ____________________________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
