On May 23, 2013, at 7:17 AM, kwal...@peoplepc.com wrote: >> When in doubt, I bracket. That takes all of, what, a few seconds? > > With the inclusion of histogram displays (all 3 channels), in modern digital > cameras, I see no need to bracket as I did for years when shooting slides. > + Take the camera indicated exposure > + Review the R, G, B channels in the histogram > + Afjust if needed, as needed. > > I shoot RAW and do notice a very slight difference between the in-camera jpeg > histogram and the histogram in the RAW convertor but it's not enough to get > excited about and still can be corrected in the RAW convertor. > Exactly. If one understands exposure and exposure comp when highlights or shadows are most important., the level of correctness that can be achieved is more than sufficient to allow for fine tuning of a final result in PhotoShop. And given the exposure latitude and high ISO noise levels of the K30 or K-5, it's a piece of cake.
> Kenneth Waller > http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles Robinson" <charl...@visi.com> > Subject: Re: Pentax K-30 in-camera RAW histogram approximation (UniWB,various > tweaks) > > >> On May 22, 2013, at 11:41 , Ciprian Dorin Craciun >> <ciprian.crac...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 7:32 PM, Charles Robinson <charl...@visi.com> wrote: >>>> However - in real-world shooting: I've been shooting RAW since about March >>>> of 2008 - starting with my K10D, then the K7, and now the K5. I've never >>>> had a problem with "not knowing what I get". The images largely just >>>> work, especially now with the K5 and its more-accurate metering and >>>> much-wider exposure latitude. >>>> >>>> Certainly it's worked closely-enough that I can rely on the crappy JPEG >>>> preview of the image to know that I'm in the right ballpark. >>> >>> I just wonder what you mean by "worked closely-enough"? Have you >>> tweaked some settings to get the JPEG much closer to the "raw" image? >>> >> >> Simple question: why would I? >> >> I mean that I get acceptable results out of the camera and have no need to >> twiddle and fiddle. >> >> When in doubt, I bracket. That takes all of, what, a few seconds? >> >> But usually I find that my exposure "correction" is off the mark, and the >> original uncorrected exposure that the camera chose is the most-usable. >> >> -Charles >> >> -- >> Charles Robinson - charl...@visi.com >> Minneapolis, MN >> http://charles.robinsontwins.org >> http://www.facebook.com/charles.robinson > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
