The problem is Shel, according to your original message, you tried it,
and you seemed to think that its better. Well, you could very well
screw up a shot because you used this technique and just scratch your
head when it looked bad. And maybe keep doing it over and over again
until dawn breaks over marble head. It helps to know your equipment
beyond what button does what.
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
I never saw the message but checked the archive when i saw Steve's
comments.. really, Gonz, I don't need or want explanations, although I
appreciate that you feel furthering my education has some merit. I point,
I shoot, I see the results. I don't care to know any more at this time.
All the math and all the explanations just go over my head. Frankly, I
don't understand your latest explanation. Makes no sense to me at all.
Please let it rest. However, I promise that if there's a need or a desire
for me to know all this, I'll be sure to ask.
Thanks.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Steve Jolly
Gonz wrote:
Let me try to explain it non-mathematically.
I still prefer "underexpose and you lose shadow detail" as an
explanation ;-)
--
Someone handed me a picture and said, "This is a picture of me when I
was younger." Every picture of you is when you were younger. "...Here's
a picture of me when I'm older." Where'd you get that camera man?
- Mitch Hedberg
