Rick Womer wrote:
And your conclusion is... ?
To me, on a quick look, exposure doesn't seem to make a difference. I
suspect I would see noise if I blew up the underexposed ones, of
course.
To me, I was able to recover a lot more detail in the underexposed
flowers. Then again, I was looking at them in lightroom at full display
resolution rather than after flickr compressed them in downsizing.
Rick
http://photo.net/photos/RickW
On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 4:44 PM, Larry Colen<l...@red4est.com> wrote:
At lunch I saw some flowers similar to the ones in the gamut/colorspace
thread and decided to do a silly experiment. I photographed the flowers,
bracketing the exposure. Then on my next errand to the post office I saw
some more flowers and shot some more bracketed exposure.
Artistically, these photos are crap, the low shutter speed versions have
some nasty camera blur. However, they are posted in a flickr album in
shutter speed order from 1/8000 down to 1/40. All shot with a K-3, ISO 100,
f/16, Tamron 18-250 at 250mm.
Some of them have my lens hood, which I used as a greycard, just as a
reference. The only processing is quick colorbalance and a quick and dirty
adjustment of exposure in post processing.
http://www.fluidr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157666819425355
--
Larry Colen l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc
--
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.
--
Larry Colen l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc
--
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.
