Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/09/10
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On Sep 9, 2007, at 3:02 PM, Steve Unsworth wrote: > Hi Tina, normally I'd agree with you, but the M8 used a non-linear > 14 (or is > it 12?) to 8 bit compression algorithm when writing the DNG files > that in my > understanding puts more of the 'bits' into the shadows than the > highlights. > So the old adage about exposing to the right doesn't work in the > same way > with the M8. let's us M8 users give it a whirl, does deliberate underexposure help or hurt... ? and report back please.... Steve > > Steve > > > On 9/9/07 22:53, "Tina Manley" <images@comporium.net> wrote: > >> At 05:35 PM 9/9/2007, you wrote: >>> The M8 has a pretty big dynamic range, especially in the shadows. >>> Recently >>> I've started using the camera with compensation of -1/3 of a stop >>> to control >>> any possible highlight blowing. >>> >>> Steve >> >> >> Steve - I used to do that, too, but after viewing a tutorial by Jeff >> Schewe about digital photography and color management, I'm having >> second thoughts. He advises to be sure the histogram is balanced to >> the right. He says that highlights contain much more recoverable >> information than shadows and that, even if the highlights look blown >> in the preview, they can be recovered in RAW files. Overexposing >> slightly gives you much less noise in the shadows. He says always >> bias the exposure as far as you can to the right without completely >> blowing out the highlights. The only time you shouldn't follow this >> advice is when using high ISOs because then you would just choose a >> lower ISO to get the same effect. I haven't experimented with this >> enough to know how it works, but I'm going to try it. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information