Same here.
Kenneth Waller
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bruce Dayton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ist D exposure question
On my D's, I rarely use multipattern. Pretty much stick with Center
weighted or spot. To me, the real problem with multipattern is that
it is unpredictable. You never really know for sure how it comes up
with the exposure. I have much better luck just using my hard earned
experience in a predictable manner.
--
Best regards,
Bruce
Monday, March 20, 2006, 8:14:56 AM, you wrote:
RW> Shel,
RW> Well, I've been shooting slides almost exclusively for
RW> 40 years, and have been using a PZ-1 and PZ-1p for the
RW> last 12 years; so I think I generally have a good
RW> handle on exposure, and I =thought= I would have a
RW> good handle on how a Pentax multipattern meter would
RW> behave. I usually use spotmetering a lot, but for
RW> quick grabs use multipattern, and was surprised by
RW> these exposures.
RW> Rick
RW> --- Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
A better way to be sure you get it right is to learn
how to expose properly
in the first place. The DS and the D offer spot
metering. You could try
experimenting (and learning) with that. Shooting
RAW may give you some
additional latitude, but there is no substitute for
proper exposure.
It sounds like you're relying too much on software
to get good results. It
may be difficult to return from working in that way.
Learn the right
exposure in the beginning. You will have better
photos forever. By
relying on software, you'll never learn how to
expose.
Shel
> [Original Message]
> From: Tim Øsleby
> Whatever mode you used, my guess is that the
camera went for the grey in
the
> sky behind the trees. It can be rather tricky to
figure out what the meter
> will think. Also in Av and Tv mode. So there is
only one way to be sure to
> get it right. Shooting raw.
>
> When I bought the camera (a DS), I had a lot of
frustrations myself.
After a
> while I tried raw, but could not get on top of
converting. Then I
downloaded
> Rawshooter Essential. This program has some auto
correction features that
> were just what I needed. All I had to do was using
ALT + E, and the
program
> suggested a conversion. Often this is close to a
good image, and it sure
was
> a good starting point, to play with the image. I
have learned a lot in a
> matter of little time using this.
>
> Most likely you will end up using raw sooner or
later. So what I am saying
> is that _now_ might be the time to take that step.
The general quality is
> better, and it does give you more headroom when
shooting.
>
> Now I have upgraded to RSP, the pay version of
RSE. There I have levels,
> curves and cropping in the converter. So now I do
most of the tweaking in
> one program. The downside of this is that it makes
me a bad photoshooper.
> But for now, I can live with that.
RW> http://www.photo.net/photos/RickW
RW> __________________________________________________
RW> Do You Yahoo!?
RW> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
RW> http://mail.yahoo.com
