It sure does work Moose :-)
How does it compare with auto-iso?
Both in term of final result, and length (cumbersomeness? should the word
exist) of processing?
> Le 3 sept. 2019 à 02:22, Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
> On 8/31/2019 11:27 PM, Philippe wrote:
>> In terms of noise, the guy may be right.
>> Now push the limits, and watch the colours …
> Wellll, I've done that. Now I'm doing it for you. ;-)
> Huge DR, intentionally underexposed to hold most highlights.The Celtic design
> scarf is colorless, almost black, in the straight conversion. The subtleties
> of color and texture in the pillow behind it are completely invisible.
> Increase exposure and pull up shadows in ACR, and the colors and details are
> all there. As the deepest shadows are exposed, a little bit, by a combination
> of fairy lights and daylight balanced, anti-SAD fluorescent at some distance,
> I don't expect perfect color. And yet, converted with ACR's Tungsten WB, the
> colors are remarkably true. Especially impressive to me are the subtle hues
> of the pillow.
> Yup, a few hot pixels in the darkest parts, easily spotted.
> Might you be living in the past, perhaps with a less than latest sensor
> system? :-)
> ISO invariance is not just about noise.
> In The Moment Moose
> What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/