:-)
Excellent!
Thanks for the laugh Chuck, did me good :-)
Amities
Philippe
Le 3 août 2014 à 23:22, Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
> I suppose Ansel Adams sent his negatives back to Kodak to have prints made.
> I'm quite sure they were "perfect" out of the camera. No doubt it was a ghost
> writer that wrote "The Print". Certainly he would have had no need for
> "post-processing".
>
> Chuck Norcutt
>
>
> On 8/3/2014 10:36 AM, Ken Norton wrote:
>> 3. If the internally produced JPEG file is good enough, what reason is
>> there to burden oneself with the hassles of RAW? The latest round of
>> cameras have really, really good conversion engines built in. We're
>> not dealing with Canon 20D JPEGs anymore.
>>
>> 4. If all you are doing is a straight conversion without performing
>> heroics to "save the image", generally speaking, there will be little
>> gain between shooting RAW and JPEG.
>>
>> 5.If you have the ability to "get it right" in-camera with proper
>> white-balance, exposure and contrast and the output file quality
>> (sharpness, resolution, etc.) is satisfactory, then adding the RAW
>> workflow is a time waster.
>>
>> 6. "Highlight Recovery" is a red herring. It is something needed in
>> only a tiny fraction of images. Frankly, if that is a person's #1
>> concern, then I think that that person needs to learn what really is
>> important in a photograph. No amount of highlight recovery is going to
>> save an image that otherwise is a tosser.
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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/
|