Chris, these were easy lighting situations so it is not surprising that the
JPGs were good. But in general, shooting JPG only is like throwing your
negatives away after having minilab prints made.
Cheers,
Nathan
Nathan Wajsman
Alicante, Spain
http://www.frozenlight.eu
http://www.greatpix.eu
http://www.nathanfoto.com
PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog
YNWA
On Jan 9, 2011, at 7:41 PM, Chris Barker wrote:
> I walked in these gardens in Cambridge today; it was a sunny day, albeit
> chilly with a low sun and I took my E-3 and G-12. I set my E-3 to record
> both RAW and jpg (I normally use RAW only) and was rather pleased with the
> results. In Aperture the jpg files need little or no adjustment, whereas the
> RAW files look a little flat and require more adjustment to make them look
> good on my monitor.
>
> I did this because I have read that the E-5 does a good job with jpgs and I
> wondered what my E-3 would be like in these lighting conditions. All I did
> was adjust the Exposure slightly and add Definition (LCE, I think). I should
> be interested in anyone's thought on the matter; there's a selection (5) here:
>
> http://threeshoes-photo.blogspot.com/
>
> Chris
>
>
>
>
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|