What do you mean, William? Isn't this what I've been saying all along? Or are you saying that if you wepose badly, you'll very likely become a great printer :-) But being a skilled printer, doesn't mean you shouln't expose properly, does it? Prints still can't produce deatails lost due to inproper exposure. Burned out highlights is a good example IMO.
What Bob said. That proper/inproper exposure is exclusivly the printers Toncern/problem. Not the photographers. This is where I disagree. And I will continue to do so. Even when shooting RAW I get bad exposures from time to time if I rely on the cvamera metering suggestions. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 20. maj 2005 15:29 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: Understanding exposure? Recommendations? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jens Bladt" Subject: 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. Jens, get a grip. If you don't learn how to make good exposures, then you are going to be spending a lot of time fixing buggered up pictures. This will involve some screwed up exposures. I became a much better darkroom worker by doing printing for photographers who didn't produce good negatives. William Robb
