It's minus one flash comp. Any less and you'd start to get a lot of motion blur. But that's a choice. Paul On Nov 3, 2007, at 5:57 PM, John Sessoms wrote:
> From: Paul Stenquist > >> Without the flash, there would be no photo. That's the tradeoff. >> Paul >> On Nov 3, 2007, at 4:21 PM, John Sessoms wrote: >> >>> From: Paul Stenquist >>> >>>> >>>> http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6595514 >>>> >>>> >>> >>> A bit too much flash for my taste. > > I didn't say without flash. No flash would be "not enough" flash. > > But, I think this has too much. Perhaps one or two stops less would be > just right. > > > -- > 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. -- 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.
