Call me what you want, but I dont see difference between the dynamic range of
both pictures.
All I see is different approach to exposure:
1. In the dog case, the photographer choose to preserve the detail in the
shadows at the expense of the highlights
2. In the cat case, the photographer choose to preserve the detail in the
highlights at the expense of the shadows.
I do think however, that photographer numero uno has chosen not to apply as
much sharpening (if at all) to the image as the second photographer did.
Best
Boris
>If I may use as an example your image of the dog:
>>http://www.pbase.com/tinamanley/image/145748288 >
>It appears flat and linear to my eyes, and it's clear that both in >shadow and
>highlight detail retention that the sensor did not have >enough dynamic range
>to capture the image. Of course, we sit with the >same problem with our
>(Micro) Four Thirds sensors. >
>If I may offer a comparable "pet" shot (don't have many of those) taken >in
>extremely harsh direct afternoon sunlight, captured on 35mm film: >
>
>http://fc05.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2011/339/6/8/mousse_portrait_by_philosomatographer-d4i9b7j.jpg
> >
>The white parts of the cat exhibit the gentlest transitions to >near-white,
>but never clips, courtesy of Kodak TMY400-2's extreme >dynamic range. This was
>shoot at ISO 400 at full midday sun at f/2.5, an >over-exposure of a
>considerable number of stops. >
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
