RoamingScott wrote:
Ah, the infamous splotchy landscape example that proves nothing, in a birding thread no less! A new personal record in irrelevance, which...no small feat!
You seem to enjoy demonstrating how little you understand about actual photography.
I know this is probably difficult for you to understand, but the issue in this thread is how to deal with subjects with large dynamic range without blowing out highlights and, as a result, the dark areas of the frame need to be recovered in post. That’s a concept that can be demonstrated — and applied — via subjects other than birds. I happened to have an example ready to go, so rather than dig into the archives and produce a new one with birds that demonstrates the same exact point I used it.
Would a bird example help you understand this basic photographic concept Scott?
Nah. You are too busy thinking up new ScottSnark to get that. Because that’s pretty much the extent of your contribution to FM discussions.
RoamingScott wrote:
Ah, the infamous splotchy landscape example that proves nothing, in a birding thread no less! A new personal record in irrelevance, which...no small feat!
You really want to demonstrate how little you understand about actual photography, don’t you?
Mar 01, 2026 at 11:14 PM
Previous versions of gdanmitchell's message #16996090 « Help with blown skies »
