View Single Post
Old 09-09-2007   #445 (permalink)
Worm324
Photocamel Master
 
Worm324's Avatar
 
Location: NY, USA
Posts: 9,530
Worm324 strides over the forum like a knight in shining armorWorm324 strides over the forum like a knight in shining armorWorm324 strides over the forum like a knight in shining armorWorm324 strides over the forum like a knight in shining armorWorm324 strides over the forum like a knight in shining armorWorm324 strides over the forum like a knight in shining armorWorm324 strides over the forum like a knight in shining armorWorm324 strides over the forum like a knight in shining armorWorm324 strides over the forum like a knight in shining armorWorm324 strides over the forum like a knight in shining armorWorm324 strides over the forum like a knight in shining armor
CamelKarma: 19652
Editing OK?: Yes
Default Re: Understanding Exposure

Great read Kelly Sry I missed you last night! That dynamic range test was very interesting indeed!

I just read what you wrote about 5 times, and I'm still a bit confused. If you expose for the highlights and assign them N, how do you know your shadows are N-4? And if you underexpose for the highlights by 1-stop, wouldn't that make the shadows 1 stop darker N-5 not brighter?

I apologize if I'm reading this wrong

In any event your assessment of underexposing a bit so you have more detail to recover, I 100% agree with. You may have a bit of noise in the shadows, but the midtone noise is going to be hard to see IMO. Unless the highlights are super bright that is and your scene looks very dark. But on average bright highlights I would much rather underexpose to have the detail in "the hair" for example and just recover the mid's by a stop or so.

Thats my thought anyway

Best,
Jay
__________________
Jason

Comments and suggestions always appreciated

-Canon: 5D MkII, EF 17-40L, EF 24-105L IS, EF 70-200L f/2.8 IS, EF 50 f/1.8, 580exII

Blog
JasonHermannPhotography.com


Worm324 is online now   Reply With Quote