On May 22, 2013, at 2:50 PM, Bruce Walker wrote:
>
> BTW, I shoot strictly RAW, no +JPEG, WB usually fixed at Cloudy, JPEG
> configuration at factory defaults or close to. I stick to a 16-bit
> post-processing workflow. I'm a stickler for image quality.
Likewise
>
> Now elsewhere you have expla
On 5/23/2013 3:36 AM, Rob Studdert wrote:
On 23 May 2013 17:44, Larry Colen wrote:
You can spend ages trying to calculate the perfect exposure. Using incident
and spot meters. Chimping the histogram and exposing to the right. Or,
you could get pretty close to the right exposure, guessing as w
From: Walt
It's amazing anyone ever took a decent digital photo before ETTR or
UniWB were devised, really.
Angels. Pin. Dancing.
--
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
: May 23, 2013 5/23/13
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
Subject: Re: Pentax K-30 in-camera RAW histogram approximation (UniWB, various
tweaks)
On 23 May 2013 17:44, Larry Colen wrote:
> You can spend ages trying to calculate the perfect exposure. Using incident
> and spot meters. C
On 23 May 2013 17:44, Larry Colen wrote:
> You can spend ages trying to calculate the perfect exposure. Using incident
> and spot meters. Chimping the histogram and exposing to the right. Or,
> you could get pretty close to the right exposure, guessing as well as you can
> on your camera, then b
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 07:34:34AM +0300, Ciprian Dorin Craciun wrote:
>
>
> >> However my main statement that the JPEG is blown out, meanwhile
> >> the RAW is somewhat underexposed still holds, as by looking at the
> >> JPEG histogram you have the impression of an overblown red channel,
> >>
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 4:35 AM, Bruce Walker wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 6:23 PM, Ciprian Dorin Craciun
> wrote:
>> Although I must make a small correction to my initial statement: I
>> was under the wrong impression that the RAW was **completely**
>> underexposed, which seems it was no
Matthew Hunt wrote:
>On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 10:08 PM, Mark Roberts
> wrote:
>
>> What was arguably his most famous photograph (Moonrise Over Hernandez) was
>> taken
>> without using the zone system. Without even using a light meter, in fact.
>
>"It is difficult to make prints from this negative
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 10:08 PM, Mark Roberts
wrote:
> What was arguably his most famous photograph (Moonrise Over Hernandez) was
> taken
> without using the zone system. Without even using a light meter, in fact.
"It is difficult to make prints from this negative that I truly like."
- Ansel A
Bruce Walker wrote:
>I'm willing to bet that the blinkies are calculated from the JPEG though.
I'd bet you'd win that bet! ;-)
Seriously, the people obsessing over the accuracy of their post-shot
histograms are just the 21st-century equivalent of the Ansel Adams
disciples fretting over every nua
I'm willing to bet that the blinkies are calculated from the JPEG though.
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 9:25 PM, Darren Addy wrote:
> I'd like to ask a question. Under Record menu, screen 5, (on my K-5,
> but I know other models have this same feature), there are Instant
> Review options. One of them i
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 6:23 PM, Ciprian Dorin Craciun
wrote:
> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 12:50 AM, Bruce Walker wrote:
> The "underexposure" is exactly the problem: in most cases although
> the JPEG (or the embedded JPEG in the RAW that we see the histogram
> for) is overexposed, t
I'd like to ask a question. Under Record menu, screen 5, (on my K-5,
but I know other models have this same feature), there are Instant
Review options. One of them is "Bright/Dark Area", which when ON will
cause your blown out highlights to blink on the LCD screen. I always
thought that this meant
A PentaxForums thread on this subject:
http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/68043-finally-camera-raw-histogram.html
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 8:09 PM, Doug Brewer wrote:
> Just to jump in here
>
>
> On 5/22/13 12:24 PM, Ciprian Dorin Craciun wrote:
>
>> Now off-topic a li
Yep.
In reality, there is precisely one degree of freedom for exposure.
You have just one thing you can do - overexpose/underexpose compared
to what your metering system tells you what the "correct" exposure is.
Anything you see on the back of the camera (histogram, flashing pixels
for over/unde
Just to jump in here
On 5/22/13 12:24 PM, Ciprian Dorin Craciun wrote:
Now off-topic a little bit to describe my personal context in all this:
* I perfectly understand that what makes the difference between a
"good" and "ordinary" photo is mainly composition (and to a less
extent the
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"
> Subject: Re:
It's amazing anyone ever took a decent digital photo before ETTR or
UniWB were devised, really.
-- Walt
On 5/22/2013 5:41 PM, Ciprian Dorin Craciun wrote:
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 12:50 AM, Bruce Walker wrote:
Now elsewhere you have explained that you want to doctor or calibrate
your histogr
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
- Original Message -
From: "Charles Robinson"
Subject: Re: Pentax K-30 in-camera RAW histogram approximation
(UniWB,various tweaks)
On May 22, 2013, at 11:41 , Ciprian Dorin Craciun
wrote:
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 7:32 PM, Charles Robinson
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 12:50 AM, Bruce Walker wrote:
> Now elsewhere you have explained that you want to doctor or calibrate
> your histogram in aid of calculating exposures for doing ETTR. You
> might want to consider that ETTR is considered by many to be no longer
> relevant and even harmful. I
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 12:50 AM, Bruce Walker wrote:
The "underexposure" is exactly the problem: in most cases although
the JPEG (or the embedded JPEG in the RAW that we see the histogram
for) is overexposed, the actual RAW data is under exposed, to the
point that almost 2
Excellent article. Thank you
Gerrit
-Original Message-
From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Bruce Walker
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 5:51 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Pentax K-30 in-camera RAW histogram approximation (UniWB,
various tweaks)
On Wed
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 4:08 PM, Ciprian Dorin Craciun
wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 8:41 PM, Bruce Walker wrote:
>> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 12:24 PM, Ciprian Dorin Craciun
>> wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 6:21 PM, Charles Robinson wrote:
For the K30 (and K5), there is so much
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 10:16 PM, George Sinos wrote:
> Everyone will enjoy the hobby in their own way. If you're into
> Landscape photography I'll suggest that, until you figure out the
> details of UniWB, you'll probably find it simpler and more useful
> bracket your exposures. Even after you
On May 22, 2013, at 11:41 , Ciprian Dorin Craciun
wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 7:32 PM, Charles Robinson 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
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 9:00 PM, Boris Liberman wrote:
> Hello and welcome. If my memory does not fail me (which it might), you're a
> new poster, at least in de-lurked sense of the word.
:) Thanks for the welcome! Yes I'm quite new (1 moth since I
bought my K-30).
> Few points:
>
> 1. It s
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 8:41 PM, Bruce Walker wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 12:24 PM, Ciprian Dorin Craciun
> wrote:
>> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 6:21 PM, Charles Robinson wrote:
>>>
>>> For the K30 (and K5), there is so much exposure latitude that if you're
>>> really worried about oversatura
Everyone will enjoy the hobby in their own way. If you're into
Landscape photography I'll suggest that, until you figure out the
details of UniWB, you'll probably find it simpler and more useful
bracket your exposures. Even after you figure out the settings for
UniWB you'll probably do that anywa
Hello and welcome. If my memory does not fail me (which it might),
you're a new poster, at least in de-lurked sense of the word.
Few points:
1. It seems this article is targeted at the people who're willing to
spend their time tinkering with the gear. Without any disrespect to you
and to the
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 12:24 PM, Ciprian Dorin Craciun
wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 6:21 PM, Charles Robinson wrote:
>>
>> For the K30 (and K5), there is so much exposure latitude that if you're
>> really worried about oversaturation, just "underexpose" by a stop.. or two..
>> or three.. a
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 7:32 PM, Charles Robinson 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,
> espec
Thanks for sharing a link to your photo-related links page! That
should keep me occupied for a while.
: )
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 11:30 AM, Ciprian Dorin Craciun
wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 7:18 PM, Darren Addy wrote:
>> I'd like to thank Ciprian for his question, without which I would have
On May 22, 2013, at 11:24 , Ciprian Dorin Craciun
wrote:
>
>> Otherwise it seems to me like so much fussing and stressing to "get the
>> right histogram" that you've forgotten that the reason you have a camera is
>> to take photos.
>
>:) Yup. I agree.
>
>However picture this, when sh
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 7:18 PM, Darren Addy wrote:
> I'd like to thank Ciprian for his question, without which I would have
> been unaware of UniWB. After a bit of reading (
> http://www.malch.com/nikon/UniWB.html ) I can see why some bother to
> try it,
:) No problem.
A little bit of s
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 6:21 PM, Charles Robinson wrote:
> On May 22, 2013, at 09:37 , Ciprian Dorin Craciun
> wrote:
>>I've been struggling twice so far to obtain the so called "UniWB"
>> on a Pentax K-30, but without any "real" success so far.
>
> I'm sorry that I don't have any help for y
I'd like to thank Ciprian for his question, without which I would have
been unaware of UniWB. After a bit of reading (
http://www.malch.com/nikon/UniWB.html ) I can see why some bother to
try it, however for the way I work I'm afraid it would cause more
problems than it would solve. I tend to shoot
On May 22, 2013, at 10:52 , Matthew Hunt wrote:
>
> UniWB, as I understand it, is an effort to find a set of camera
> settings (white balance, etc.) that makes the displayed histogram come
> as close as possible to this ideal.
>
Ugh - sounds like a lot of work. For the K30 (and K5), there is s
When you view the histogram on your camera, the histogram is based on
the JPEG rendering of the photo, even if you're shooting raw. That
means that the R,G,B channels shift relative to each other based on
the white balance setting, the saturation point changes based on the
contrast, etc., even thou
On May 22, 2013, at 09:37 , Ciprian Dorin Craciun
wrote:
>Hello all!
>
>I've been struggling twice so far to obtain the so called "UniWB"
> on a Pentax K-30, but without any "real" success so far.
>
I'm sorry that I don't have any help for you on this other than to ask: why?
It sound
Hello all!
I've been struggling twice so far to obtain the so called "UniWB"
on a Pentax K-30, but without any "real" success so far.
Has anyone been able to succeed at this? (And maybe share a raw
photo that has the appropriate WB settings?)
I've tried the method described on
h
40 matches
Mail list logo
