The wording is pretty useless, Russ, in my view. The text should use the word
"reproduce" rather than "capture". The way I read it, quoted in your post,
everything with the colour in question would have been rendered monochrome.
But wording aside, 2 ideas spring to mind: the colour is as the photographer
remembered; and the lighting plays a large part in the colour as reproduced by
the sensor and its processors. So I should be a little sceptical about the
accuracy of that part of the article.
On the other hand, deep red is a colour that we know is difficult to reproduce
on the screen from a digital capture, so perhaps that "purple" is another such
weak point.
Chris
On 15 Jan 2010, at 02:47, Russ Butler wrote:
> I read the section you referenced on
> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse620/page17.asp
>
> and continued reading to the Overall Image Quality / Specifics section
> at the bottom.
>
> There it says
> "The only real issue we experienced (and even then, only very
> occasionally), was the E-620's difficulty in capturing certain shades of
> purple. It's an extremely minor complaint (the likelihood of most people
> noticing it is tiny),"
>
> TINY? The reviewer has to be kidding. I'd be really upset if I saw the
> image on the right and the camera gave me the one on the left. It takes
> quite a bit of fiddling with blue hue(+30) and saturation(-30) on the
> camera jpeg to get even close to the "approximation of actual color"
> image. I've never had to make such drastic adjustments on raw print film
> scans to get an image to ~match what I saw. (& I've done a lot.)
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|