brainiac wrote:
I am afraid I don\'t agree that the exposure in the OP image is incorrect or misleading in any way. This is a 200 iso image WITH NO EXPOSURE ADJUSTMENT APPLIED, and yet there is a visible criss-cross/banding pattern in flat shadows. All the rest is hot air.
In particular, the suggestion that I should have overexposed this image to make use of the higher levels neglects the fact that this was a very low contrast picture and a more typical picture would not allow one to expose further to the right without blowing highlights. People are going to see criss-cross texture in large prints in fairly common circumstances, and the intrusion of the criss-cross pattern will leave less room for pushing the shadows, which is a vital method for coping with very contrasty scenes.
I know my reply was long - maybe too long - but I addressed both of those issues: why this is not the \"right\" (or at least optimum) exposure for this scene and how to handle the high dynamic range scenes you mention.
I\'ll stick with my response at this point.
Take care,
Dan
Feb 05, 2009 at 06:37 PM
Previous versions of danmitchell's message #6686513 « 5D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3 »
