Re: Understanding exposure? Recommendations?

[Paul Stenquist]

I think Shel's right in his contention that the "art" of exposure is 
disappearing, but it's no less important. Even working in a strictly 
digital world, an understanding of exposure its finer points will 
separate truly good work from the merely adequate. With studio 
situations involving backlight and fill or even trying to produce 
spot-on color on location, precise control of exposure variables can 
return big dividends. What's more, how can anyone judge the importance 
of these variables if they don't even understand them? As my Stuttgart 
engineer friend once said, "You can never know too much."
Paul
On May 20, 2005, at 6:37 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:

Jens, Bob ...
I've been reading the discussion between the both of you.  You're both
right, one or the other more so depending on just what and how one 
wants to
learn about exposure, and how much involvement one wants in the 
process.
I've made my views on other aspects of the debate known, so I won't 
rehash
them here.  I will say that it's good that this discussion comes up 
once a
year or so as the "art" of exposure is disappearing, and we've entered 
the
age of the "generic" exposure because of all the automation and fancy
built-in metering that cameras contain these days.

Shel

[Original Message]
From: Jens Bladt

You can subtract shades of grey - when printing - but realy not add 
them.
If
they are gone (in a too hard neg.), they are really gone.
BTW - one of the reasons I like Pentax *ist D. The images are soft 
and not
over sharpened. This means I don't loose information before I even 
get to
see my recordings. I will decide later, which shades I don't want. The
competing camera brands (Rebel and  D70) seem to me to have too much 
"on
board sharpening" and "on board contrast". They loose information 
from the
start. They are for amateurs - not for the enthusiast or pro.
Regards
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt

-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
Fra: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 20. maj 2005 09:09
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: RE: Understanding exposure? Recommendations?
I don't agree. It has nothing to do with printing. We are talking 
about
exposure here - not about how to resque faulty exposures.

First of all, to be a good printer (I belive, I used to be one - 
before
the
digital revolution) it's prefered to start out with the best possible
negative (or digital image). That is properly exposed negatives, 
slides or
image files. Where all shades between black and white are represented.
When printing you can "subtract" to get what you want.
Secondly, I was still talking about the negs, not the prints. You 
can't
get
out of a print what's not there in a neg.
You can subtract shades of grey - when printing - but realy not add 
them.
If
they are gone (in a too hard neg.), they are really gone.
This is also one of the reasons that the "contrast/brightness" tool 
is a
dangerous tool. You loose information. Using "levels" or
"shadow/highlight"
is better.
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
Fra: Bob W [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 20. maj 2005 08:33
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: RE: Understanding exposure? Recommendations?
Yes - those things are important for people who want to go on to 
become
good
printers. But you have to be able to walk before you can run.
--
Cheers,
 Bob
That's true, Bob.
But you are missing out good old techniques to increase
contrast by underexsposure/overdevelopment and decreasing
contrast by overexsposure/underdevelopment.

I recommend slide film lab as a better medium for early
lessons in exposure.
There are too many variables involved in b&w development that
detract from the early important stuff about exposure.