Trying to respond to this again... Don't you love mail client programs
that can't figure out the account an email is tied to?
I'm personally a fan of on lens filters. First of all, I shoot mixed
formats and secondly the less bit-bending you have to do in post the
better. Sure, you can apply gradients in post, recover highlights and
even pull shadows up 14 stops, but in doing so you lose color
fidelity, tonal gradients and end up pulling shadow noise up where it
shouldn't be. With most digital files if you try to recover the shadow
too much you see a nasty shadow transition as well as color shifts.
Highlight recovery may also cause unusual color shifts at the extremes
in exposure.
But my approach isn't an either or, but not being afraid of using both
techniques. Is there anything wrong with trying to get it right
in-camera? Of course not--provided that it isn't a hardship to do so.
Ag
On Wednesday, June 2, 2010, Bob Whitmire <bwhitmire@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> You just don't blow out the sky. You know the drill: expose for the
> highlights, post process for the shadows. <g>
>
> Of course I don't recall now if we were talking film or digital, but
> if shooting digital, push that histogram all the way to the right--
> after experimentation to see when stuff really does start getting
> blown out. It's my understanding that the histogram you see on the
> back of the camera is generated from the in-camera .jpg, and does not
> necessarily closely relate to the actual RAW file. Without
> experimentation, it's not terribly reliable. I've messed with the D3
> enough now to pretty well tell when I've pushed to the limit. There is
> an incredible amount of information in those highlights that is
> recoverable with the proper post-processing approach.
>
> And watch that "fake filter" talk, Bub. <g> ACR's graduated filter is
> no more fake than a piece of glass hung out in front of your lens.
> It's just different.
>
> --Bob Whitmire
> www.bobwhitmire.com
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jun 1, 2010, at 8:45 PM, Sue Pearce wrote:
>
>>
>>> If you use ACR, you've got a built-in grad filter that's infinitely
>>> customizable. Add the gradient feature in Photoshop and you can leave
>>> the filters at home. Not necessary.
>>>
>> I'm having trouble understanding how this is suitable. If a sky is
>> blown
>> out, no amount of curves or fake filters can get info that was never
>> there.
>>
>> Bill Pearce
>
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
>
--
Ken Norton
ken@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.zone-10.com
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|