Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/03/03

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] IMG: Casual Portrait...now RAW
From: philippe.amard at tele2.fr (Philippe AMARD)
Date: Mon Mar 3 12:29:15 2008
References: <20080302223928.63377D7B@resin15.mta.everyone.net> <290D28E6-3A1C-4862-A13D-C4A8200DE35C@bigpond.net.au> <3cad89990803030211q3b1d96e9n2cd7c3973a7d2b91@mail.gmail.com> <BB95CA64-2518-4B81-98F3-AEB002A29EAC@cox.net> <3cad89990803030714i3f7723c6i1b7d25e77407f65d@mail.gmail.com> <435A5CFF-7C94-43E7-A599-3F73206CF221@cox.net> <3e7573d40803030841g31dc45b3r1635d55ac8399d7a@mail.gmail.com> <5C40FAD6-B247-4290-8636-E762F75306B1@cox.net> <3e7573d40803030857q53a48544g875fd50d5bd8e0c6@mail.gmail.com> <CC5DDB89-351E-408F-BDE4-FC73E955AAB4@cox.net>

Steve Barbour wrote:

>
> On Mar 3, 2008, at 9:57 AM, leo wesson wrote:
>
>> Steve,
>>
>> Yes, the histogram has a 0 and a 255, that's what's important and  
>> that's
>> what is affected by exposure. I'm not sure that there is a "right" in
>> digital.  Except for shooting raw, that's always right.
>
>
> if that is the case, doesn't it imply that there is no need to set  
> aperture or time for exposure ?
>
>
> why bother ?
>
> Steve
>
>
>

So long as the values of what you shoot remain within the range of the 
sensor and sofware processing capabilities, I'd be tempted to say no.
Magic!
;-)


But then you have to fiddle :-(

phx



>
>
>>  I will often
>> process my raw at different settings and combine them for extended  
>> details.
>> There are a lot of wrongs however...
>>
>>
>> Leo Wesson
>> Photographer/Videographer
>> 817.733.9157
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 10:48 AM, Steve Barbour <kididdoc@cox.net>  
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Mar 3, 2008, at 9:41 AM, leo wesson wrote:
>>>
>>>> Steve,
>>>>
>>>> In my experience, a digital neg has more latitude than a  conventional
>>>> negative.  Plus 1, minus 1 stop, all well within the raw latitude.
>>>
>>>
>>> thanks Leo... so if I understand, the RAW IS affected by the light
>>> settings, it's just that there is sufficient latitude so that
>>> corrections can be successfully applied later...
>>>
>>>
>>> if it's not "right",
>>>
>>>
>>> as we do with film negatives...
>>>
>>>
>>> is this correct?
>>>
>>> Steve
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Leo Wesson
>>>> Photographer/Videographer
>>>> 817.733.9157
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 9:27 AM, Steve Barbour <kididdoc@cox.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mar 3, 2008, at 8:14 AM, Jayanand Govindaraj wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> As far as I know, it is.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I am somehow having trouble with this Jayanand...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> as this says that camera settings affecting the amount of light
>>>>> hitting the sensor, do not change the "negative"...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> but we all know that a true film negative is altered by these
>>>>> setttings.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Since RAW is the digital negative, why is that not also affected ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyone ?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Steve
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Leica Users Group.
>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>>
>>>
>>> best, Steve Barbour
>>> "I never wanted to be famous" out soon.
>>> kididdoc@cox.net
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Leica Users Group.
>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Leo Wesson
>> Photographer/Videographer
>> 817.733.9157
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>
> best, Steve Barbour
> "I never wanted to be famous" out soon.
> kididdoc@cox.net
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>

In reply to: Message from afirkin at afirkin.com (afirkin@afirkin.com) ([Leica] IMG: Casual Portrait with Summilux 50 asph)
Message from hoppyman at bigpond.net.au (Geoff Hopkinson) ([Leica] IMG: Casual Portrait with Summilux 50 asph)
Message from jayanand at gmail.com (Jayanand Govindaraj) ([Leica] IMG: Casual Portrait with Summilux 50 asph)
Message from kididdoc at cox.net (Steve Barbour) ([Leica] IMG: Casual Portrait with Summilux 50 asph)
Message from jayanand at gmail.com (Jayanand Govindaraj) ([Leica] IMG: Casual Portrait with Summilux 50 asph)
Message from kididdoc at cox.net (Steve Barbour) ([Leica] IMG: Casual Portrait...now RAW)
Message from leowesson at gmail.com (leo wesson) ([Leica] IMG: Casual Portrait...now RAW)
Message from kididdoc at cox.net (Steve Barbour) ([Leica] IMG: Casual Portrait...now RAW)
Message from leowesson at gmail.com (leo wesson) ([Leica] IMG: Casual Portrait...now RAW)
Message from kididdoc at cox.net (Steve Barbour) ([Leica] IMG: Casual Portrait...now RAW)