Rockwell is a yutz. I do my best to avoid reading his blog.
Strowe is half-right. With RAW, it's possible to take almost any image, no matter how badly exposed, and diddle it until there's something salvagable, even if the resulting picture barely resembles the original scene. But why?
I'm with Ctein on this one. Do what you have to to get the image. If that means post, that means post. But getting it right in the camera is still the most desirable thing.
Getting it right in the camera is so much easier now, though. Digital is starting to reach the exposure latitude of film, and is exceeding the speed, tonal range and resolution. Smarter exposure systems mean you get a reasonably-exposed shot a lot more often. Smarter focus systems help you avoid focus issues.
With all those technical demons subdued, it comes down to a matter of light and composition, which is the real difficult part...
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2009-03-29 10:16 pm (UTC)Strowe is half-right. With RAW, it's possible to take almost any image, no matter how badly exposed, and diddle it until there's something salvagable, even if the resulting picture barely resembles the original scene. But why?
I'm with Ctein on this one. Do what you have to to get the image. If that means post, that means post. But getting it right in the camera is still the most desirable thing.
Getting it right in the camera is so much easier now, though. Digital is starting to reach the exposure latitude of film, and is exceeding the speed, tonal range and resolution. Smarter exposure systems mean you get a reasonably-exposed shot a lot more often. Smarter focus systems help you avoid focus issues.
With all those technical demons subdued, it comes down to a matter of light and composition, which is the real difficult part...