Good thought but I think my chance of talking to the stage manager is
about zero. It raises an interesting question in my mind about how the
DVD turned out. This event is always recorded on video and a DVD is
made available for sale after the event. My son doesn't buy it because
it's too expensive and my granddaughter is only on stage for about 5-10
minutes out of a 2 hour long production. I just wonder how the video
cameras (with long lenses shooting from the back of the auditorium) fare
under the same lighting conditions. Actually, since they do sell the
DVD, I have been surprised for the past two years that they have never
objected to me coming in with the 5D and a big lens.
After adjusting the color temperature for most shots into the 2800-3500K
range the overly bright red was considerably subdued but still too
bright to be completely recovered with just the "recovery" slider in
ACR. Most of it could be handled by dropping the overall exposure along
with the recovery slider but then the overall exposure was much too dark.
The 5D treats me well most of the time so I think I'll keep it despite
its shortcomings. :-)
Chuck Norcutt
C.H.Ling wrote:
> May be you can talk to the stage manager, @ ISO3200 F2.8 1/60s is just too
> dark for enjoying the performance! The Chinese Opera I just shot was having
> a minimum light level of ISO400 F4 1/60s, four stops brighter than yours.
>
> For the difference in RGB channels, did you set the WB to 2800-3200K? Some
> lower power stage light may be just too warm. Finally, if everything just
> didn't work out, send me your 5D and purchase a 5D Mark II, which should
> give you extra one or two stops to work with ;-)
>
> C.H.Ling
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Chuck Norcutt" <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>> Yes, you and CH and Marc are absolutely correct. Putting it in terms of
>> flash lighting the subject and the exposure being the same from
>> different distances snapped all into clarity. I don't know what I was
>> thinking. Maybe I was looking too hard for an answer to a problem which
>> was something I could control (my distance to the subject rather than
>> the intensity of the light source). It was just an unfortunate
>> circumstance that the subject-camera distance math worked out to support
>> my twisted logic.
>>
>> Now I just did what I should have done in the first place. I put a
>> bunch of thumbnails from both events on the screen side-by-side in a
>> browser. It's perfectly clear scrolling through those thumbnails
>> side-by-side that, just as CH said, the overall illumination level of
>> the 2008 event is considerably less than the 2007 event. And it's not
>> simple underexposure. Most frames in the 2008 event have many parts of
>> the image overexposed in the red channel while the green and blue
>> channels are about two stops below the red.
>>
>> The real conclusion is what I didn't want to hear. My 5D at ISO 3200
>> and with an f/2.8 lens are not necessarily adequate to the annual task.
>> Two stops will be a big hurdle to overcome.
>>
>> Thanks all,
>> Chuck Norcutt
>>
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|