Godfrey, You've got to explain this. Digital sensors can't give any detail in overexposed highlights. You can recover details in underexposed areas with post processing. So don't you want to avoid blown highlights at all costs? Regards, Bob S.
On 7/4/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sensors respond to light differently compared to film. Chapters one > and two of Bruce Fraser's "Real World Camera Raw with Photoshop CS2" > explains why there is a difference. As a result, exposure evaluation > requires a different mindset and different settings. JPEG and slide > film, although they are different, generally end up taking about the > same exposure. > > However, underexposing in RAW by 0.3-0.5 EV is exactly the wrong way > to go. In general, with the *ist DS, I find my average exposure for > RAW capture requires +0.3-0.7 EV additional exposure compared to JPEG > or slide film. > > Godfrey > > > On Jul 4, 2006, at 7:09 AM, Jens Bladt wrote: > > > I didn't know there was a different mindset for digital - except > > for trying > > harder to avoid overexposure/blown out highlights. I usually regard > > JPEGs as > > slides, RAW as negs. > > I have BTW noticed that I'm not the only one who normally underexposes > > deliberately by 0.3-0.5 F-stop. (I shoot RAW 99% of the time). > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
