On 5/23/2013 3:36 AM, Rob Studdert wrote:
On 23 May 2013 17:44, Larry Colen <[email protected]> wrote:
You can spend ages trying to calculate the perfect exposure. Using incident
and spot meters. Chimping the histogram and exposing to the right. Or,
you could get pretty close to the right exposure, guessing as well as you can
on your camera, then bracket the exposure and choose the best one afterwards.
Or, if you're very ambitious, bracket, then use HDR software to improve on
the dynamic range of the camera. (note, I don't mean dialing the tone mapping
up to 11, getting the surreal effect)
Larry, you're making a heap of sense here. If I screwed around trying
to find the perfect exposure for all of my shots I wouldn't have half
the ones that I really like. I like the idea of getting things
techically perfect, it's the engineer in me I'm sure but artistically
the technical aspects of the shot are generally of far less
consequence than the content/subject matter.
Agreed 100%.
In fact, I regularly use under-exposure to knock down disagreeable
backgrounds, or for a sense of mood. And when I'm taking what I think is
a high priority photo and have time to set the camera up, I always
bracket 2/3. That seems to work reasonably well, albeit not 100% of the
time. Beyond that, I long ago came to the conclusion that some of my
favorite images are technical abominations, and some of my crappiest are
technically excellent.
-- Walt
--
Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio)
Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours
Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
