Glad that others see what I see. :-) I work from a laptop with a dubious screen right now, so I do all the editing by histogram, primarily. According to the histogram, there's no clipping of the shadows in either channel. I also double-checked that it looked okay on my smartphone screen, just in case. Can't be more uncalibrated than that, I figured... The image is taken well after sunset, with a deep indigo colour to the sky. The camera naturally wanted to expose the scene closer to midtones, so I had to darken it in post to get the night-time mood.
I tried to do some Radermacherish night shots too, but it really wasn't dark enough. The pictured scene required f/32 at ISO 200 for an exposure of 4 minutes. The resulting exposure suffered from heat shimmer (yes, you do get that at low temps also) and diffraction, so I wasn't happy with it. I learned two things, though. One is that the noise levels look very good, and the other is that long exposures are very demanding on the battery in cold conditions. In general, I find that the 645D is more of a challenge to carry across temperature gradients than are K-mount DSLRs. I may be just the sheer bulk of the thing calling for longer heat-up time, but the camera itself feels colder when outdoors too. I think the metal % is higher in this baby than in K-mount. And same goes for the lenses, except the FA 35mm f/3.5. I guess the new DFA 55 would do better too. The old 645-A series is virtually all metal, and so are many of the 645-FA. Jostein 2011/3/19 Doug Franklin <jehosep...@mindspring.com>: > On 2011-03-18 22:08, Matthew Hunt wrote: > >> My uncalibrated Dell 2209WA IPS monitor also does fine by it. The >> thing that threw me a little is that the purple, snowy slopes are so >> smooth, they present a textureless appearance similar to clipped >> shadows. But they're not clipped, as evidenced by the pure black >> shadows mixed in with the snow. It's just the way they are. I'm always >> a fan of jarring semi-abstracts that take some work to figure out. I >> approve. > > Don't get me wrong. Shot in darkness or not, I think it could use a bit of > a luminance boost. But it's not my photo. :-) There's a chance that a lot > of detail hides in that darkness. But I think it works as it stands, too. > It's one of those deals where I would have done it a little differently, > but I think it's an artistic choice, so going overboard on describing my > viewpoint probably wouldn't help the photographer. We just have different > visions of the thing. :-) > > -- > Thanks, > DougF (KG4LMZ) > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. > -- http://www.alunfoto.no/galleri/ http://alunfoto.blogspot.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
