[Leica] Leica Digilux 2 @ 1600 :-)

[bdcolen at earthlink.net (B. D. Colen)]

I'm going to try again. 

-----Original Message-----
From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org
[mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of
Ted Grant
Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 10:39 AM
To: Leica Users Group
Subject: Re: [Leica] Leica Digilux 2 @ 1600 :-)


B. D. Colen offered:
Subject: RE: [Leica] Leica Digilux 2 @ 1600 :-)


> I have too say, however, that much as I respect, admire, and like Ted,

> I don't get what he's claiming. I took a few shots yesterday setting 
> my iso for 400, dialing in -2EV, and what I got was - two grossly 
> underexposed images in which I could see the noise on the LCD. No, I 
> didn't download them and follow the rest of his formula - I'll try 
> that today. But I don't get it. Unless - and this may be the trick - 
> IF he's shooting in really low-light, very contrasty situations, if 
> he's taking an overall reading of the scene, what he may be 
> unwittingly doing is exposing properly for the highlights, which are 
> at least two to three stops above the shadows, and turning the shadows

> to solid black, so that the noise disappears in the shadows. Just a 
> thought.<<<<<<

Hi B.D.,
This is exactly what I do and for whatever reason it produces fine
"un-noisy prints at 11.7 X 16.5 on Epson Enhanced matte and or
semi-lustre paper." Matte black ink on the matte paper and photo black
on lustre paper. My preference is for enhanced matte paper prints.

Digilux 2 set at 400 ISO,  EV scale slide bar over 2 stops under
exposed. Then shoot pictures! Looking on the screen of the camera and
first down load to computer, images are dark as under exposed.

Then in PhotoShop, I either auto-level or go into levels and make a
slight change as the image looks on computer screen to my eye and save!
That's it, other than occasionally a slight contrast increase.

The metering is strictly in-camera "auto exposure in multi-field setting
of meter!" Then it's look through viewfinder, compose, shoot!"

The later fiddling I explained above. I've shown prints to people who
are experienced viewers of  photographs good, bad and ugly and they all
respond with..... "Well I don't see anything wrong with that print
quality!"

So obviously there's something different here from what you are saying
and doing compared to what happens.  On the one hand I find it
frustrating because I keep thinking these should be ugly noisy prints
and poor quality re-productions, but they aren't. And I wish to hell I
knew what's happening compared to what other shooters are experiencing.

By the same token I'm pleased at what I see in B&W pushed settings that
I thought wasn't possible .

ted


_______________________________________________
Leica Users Group.
See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information