Toralf Lund wrote: >>>>Negative film gives the lab about a stop of underexposure and about 3 stops >>>>of over exposure before a good print can't be pulled from it, a jpeg has >>>>about half that latitude. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>Doesn't this mean that what we ought to keep in mind is >>> >>> It is better to overexpose than underexpose >>> >>>for digital *and negative film*? (But maybe some of you have been >>>thinking that way all along?) >>> >>> >>> >>That's correct, I rate Superia 400 at 320; others go even further than >>that. >> >> >> >Ah. Yes. There you have it. I heard people recommend this a number of >times, of course, only I didn't think of it in this context... > >But, but, isn't a similar trick available for digital? Can't you just >reduce the gain a bit and try to get an exposure "in the middle" (with >the same exposure) rather than aiming for an exposure "to the right" >(with a somewhat higher gain setting)? > >- Toralf > > >
No, because of the way digital sensors work(See Godders' superb explanation upthread), you get more usable information with an exposure 'to the right' on Digital. So you almost always want to get right in below the clipping point with digital (At least when shooting RAW). -Adam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
