Re: Chalk one up for Digital.
- From: "Baron Sloan" <alan.zzzzzrobson.spam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 12:25:22 +0100
"Joseph Meehan" <sligojoe_Spamno@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:NI8%e.57137$vJ4.34404@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> <RJ> wrote:
>> I recently took some flash pics of
>> the interior of a mission-church.
>>
>> When I move them to my computer,
>> the images were dark... almost black.
>> To much dark interior, not enough flash
>>
>> I was getting ready to <delete>
>> when I decided to try out the image adjust
>> features in KODAK Easyshare.
>>
>> SHAZAM !! All the detail,
>> all the color... back on the screen.
>> A great recovery of all my interior pics.
>>
>> I know that on a 35mm film, they would've been lost pics.
>>
>> It's amazing how many marginal shots get rescued from the
>> discard heap by the photo-edit program.
>>
>>
>> <rj>
>
> Generally film has more capacity to recover from over-under exposure,
> but it also requires more skill and equipment that few photographers had
> and even fewer have today. The great work of those developing digital
> tools has made it much easier and available to far more people.
>
> --
> Joseph Meehan
>
In my many years of experience using slide film, if a picture was badly
underexposed, the black areas were simply that, black!
Whereas I've recovered some desperately underexposed digital photos of black
unlit interiors, where the flash was woefully inadequate, and managed to
bring out a lot of fine detail from the 'black' areas of the photo.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Chalk one up for Digital.
- From: Joseph Meehan
- Re: Chalk one up for Digital.
- References:
- Re: Chalk one up for Digital.
- From: Joseph Meehan
- Re: Chalk one up for Digital.
- Prev by Date: Re: picture's file size
- Next by Date: 2 yr old camera...need advice.
- Previous by thread: Re: Chalk one up for Digital.
- Next by thread: Re: Chalk one up for Digital.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|