Very interesting. Shooting raw has allowed you to recover the one stop
underexposure but at the expense of really aggravating the noise. I'll
have to watch out for this in the future. Especially since I sometimes
deliberately process the same exposure as one stop under and one stop
over so I can build a higher dynamic range composite.
I don't think I've ever used a composite in a large print or built one
shot at high ISO but I'll have to critically examine the result next time.
Chuck Norcutt
Wayne S wrote:
> OK, one factor I did not take into account is the exposure setting
> in camera raw. Both of these images were shot in sequence, but
> I was using spot metering, so the exposure varied. The Raw
> conversion in CS2 was 1 stop more exposure on the first.
>
> E-1, 1/8sec, F4, 54mm 100%crop
> http://www.zuik.net/E1/800minus1stop_A147879.jpg
>
> E-1, 1/4sec, F4, 54mm 100%crop
> http://www.zuik.net/E1/800minus0stop_A147880.jpg
>
> So, more noise prevalent in the first because of that adjustment.
>
> Wayne
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|
