On 20 Mar 2006 at 10:45, Rick Womer wrote: > > > --- Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Shel, > > The pix are here: > http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=583164 > > The "adjusted" pix weren't adjusted for the sake of > beauty (they're pretty washed out), but rather to see > if there was any data in the blocked-up foreground.
Well it's there but exaggerated like that it certainly isn't great, don't expect too much from jpg, remember that a lot of the available data has been discarded and the DSLR can saturate in an uglier fashion than slide film. Using the gamma adjustment to move the middle gray will render both images quite printable. I don't shoot JPG images and I suspect that the *ist D isn't really biased towards and optimized JPG capture but I generally get very usable exposures when capturing RAW files using multi-pattern metering. Often they don't look great as unmodified conversions but they generally accommodate the exposure range well which facilitates and optimum RAW conversion. It's worth doing a quick experiment if you have the facilities to post process RAW, shoot at the same spot in similar light if you can both in JPG and RAW and just to see how much more range is available in the RAW capture. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
