m43 does western USA

Started Dec 11, 2011 | Discussions thread
Yohan Pamudji Senior Member • Posts: 2,874
Re: m43 does western USA

JamesCarruthers wrote:

Yohan Pamudji wrote:

Some of the others were exposed lower than "normal" but I could see your intent and more importantly approved of it (because, you know, I'm the central clearinghouse of all artistic intent). The ones I listed are ones where I didn't think there was any benefit to underexposing, but feel free to disagree of course. Those are just the ones I would have exposed a bit brighter, but that's often personal preference. If you chose exposures for a particular purpose/style and are happy with it then I have no beef with that.

In any case, loved the set. Put up some more if you've got them.

Thanks Yohan.

I usually expose to how I see— if it's dark then the exposure is compensated. I often see where people haven't bothered with exposure compensation and shade suddenly becomes much lighter. I always figure the camera doesn't really know how bright it is— and they tend to err on brighter. I was also generally exposing so that nothing was blown out and perhaps haven't bought up the shadows as much as I could.

The one of the desert is about right— it could have been a little brighter— but it was 10am and mostly overcast.

The food ones are inside— and it was quite dark— however what I see on my screen is what I remember from taking them.

That's the fun (or infuriating, depending on your point of view) thing about exposure--it's hard to say there's necessarily a right or wrong to it. Intent plays a large part in determining if exposure is correct for a given shot.

The desert one I was borderline about. I could see it being ok; just think if I had taken that shot I would have lifted it a tad.

The food ones... that's where we'll have to disagree. I think there's lots of room for exposing as one sees, but sometimes that's not necessary or even desirable. I would put food shots in that category almost universally. Assuming you're mainly documenting your meals, I think being able to clearly see what you ate trumps any sense of principle/duty to expose for how the scene looked.

In terms of avoiding blowout, I'm not as bothered about it as many seem to be. Not saying you are per se, just saw that you mentioned it. There's an obsession for some with not blowing out highlights at any cost, which I believe to be counter-productive. Some memorable shots of mine have had significant/huge areas blown out, although admittedly those weren't landscapes. In terms of sky vs. ground in landscapes I usually try to get exposure to where in post I can lift the shadows a bit and recover the highlights a bit as well. I'm sure the highlight purists are appalled when they see the blown-out highlights in clouds in my shots, but thankfully I don't answer to them

That's just my view on it. Hope that helps clarify and is taken in the spirit it was intended.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow