>
>> I took an additional photo of the tree with a #25 red filter attached.
>> When viewing it in Olympus
>>Viewer (OV) I noticed that the histogram was largely off-scale at the top.
>>This may be why I get the
>>blanket grey when converting to JPEG B&W. But that does not explain the
>>ongoing problem with the emulated
>>red filter.
>
>Hmm. Sounds like you pushed the exposure up to compensate for the red
>filter. Shoot it again with the same exposure as with no filter.
>
<<SNIP>>
I went back outside and retook that photo as you suggested. The result
was that the histogram is a still saturated, but there is no clutter to the
right of the red bandwidth as before. I did a JPEG B&W conversion with no
adjustment, and the result was very pleasing with the expected darkened sky.
There is little in the image other than the tree and sky, so I cannot access
the overall effect but I can see that the result of the sky and tree in B&W is
encouraging.
I had read somewhere that underexposing the image in advance of B&W
conversion was helpful, and this seems to verify that. So, I am going to
experiment with this thoroughly and see what evolves.
>
>So, I'm assuming, from your statement, that you ended up over-exposing
>the sensor by letting the meter get fooled by the filter or by all the
>years of history in applying a filter factor to the exposure.
>
Yes, I was doing just that. Old school syndrome. The question now is how
much underexposure should be applied, or just take a reading without the filter
and then shoot with the filter and no adjustment?
Exposed minds want to know. :{b
Chris
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro
- Hunter S. Thompson
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|