On 2/7/06, Jens Bladt, discombobulated, unleashed: >Give me a brake, Cotty, I've been photograping for 40-45 years - digitally >for the last three.. I do know how to meter. I also know several digital >photographers who, just like me, underexposes 0.3-0.5 F-stop ALL THE TIME >in order to avoid burned out highlights. Then comes colour problems, that >has to be dealt with. I can't really show you a "before and after" editing >exsample, because I shoot RAW exclusively. Already in the RAW conversion, >there's some - perhaps 25-50% of the total editing. Don't tell me you shoot >digital and do not edit. I don't know anybody who does.
Er, if you read the attribution lines below, you will find that I did not write the post - Aaron did. Please get your facts right. My original reply to your post was thus: ---------------- On 1/7/06, Jens Bladt, discombobulated, unleashed: >Digital >photography is for people that are either rather uncritical or have a lot of >time on their hands. Soprry Jens, but you're nuts pal! -------------------- I even left the spelling error in. I stand by my statement that you're nuts pal! Digital photography is NOT for people who are uncritical NOR who have a lot of time on their hands as you say. That is being offensive to a lot of people who put time and energy into something that you casually wave off with a sweeping and snide remark. I responded in an appropriate way IMO. Now if you'd care to read the text below, you will see that I did not mention your metering ability once. No apology needed. > >Jens Bladt >http://www.jensbladt.dk >+45 56 63 77 11 >+45 23 43 85 77 >Skype: jensbladt248 > >-----Oprindelig meddelelse----- >Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Aaron >Reynolds >Sendt: 2. juli 2006 03:50 >Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >Emne: Re: Coming Soon - A new K-mount Film Camera > > >On Jul 1, 2006, at 6:56 PM, Jens Bladt wrote: > >> I don't know about P&S cameras, but my Pentax DSLR's doesn't deliver >> usable >> photographs without editing - they would be pale, unsharp and dull. >> Editing >> is a must. >> In order to avoid to much contrast (lost mid-tones) or burned out high >> lights (Improve dynamics) I set the camera to make rather dull >> pictures. I >> think I have to edit more than 95% of all exposurers in order to get >> decent >> photographs. > >What your problem is, it appears, is your ability to meter. Compare it >to shooting slides, except that you have the ability to control >contrast easily while shooting. Once you know how your camera meters >and how it performs in different contrast situations, you can set it >appropriately. As to sharpness -- if it's always not sharp enough, why >are you not turning the sharpness up? If you're overly concerned about >losing highlight or shadow, you could always bracket if you don't trust >your own judgment. > >> When I use film, the lab takes care of this. I don't believe >> this is the case with digital printing. > >Actually, if you are going to a "regular" minilab, your digital files >are going through the same averaging process that your negatives go >through. If you're having custom prints made, they are not. So, in >fact, you can just send them your dull files. You should try it -- >around here it's cheap as dirt. > >> Digital is slow and very time consuming. But it's VERY, VERY >> affordable! > >Meanwhile, when I shoot with digital professionally, I am doing it >because it's so much faster to turn around the image. Film is slow and >time consuming. Digital is fast fast fast. If you think film is fast >simply because you turn over all control of your image to a lab, you're >not making a valid comparison -- do the same with your digital and see >what happens. > >-Aaron -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=====| http://www.cottysnaps.com _____________________________ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
