Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Horoscope Fish" data-source="post: 389111" data-attributes="member: 13090">Looking at the shots in Post 13 it seems to me they are pretty well exposed, depending on what you're wanting to expose FOR. Lets look at the woman holding the drawing; her face looks perfectly exposed to me. Yes, the pad she's holding is blown out, but if we were to expose for the drawing pad instead, her face would be under-exposed.&nbsp;The shots of the building look well exposed to me as well, depending again on what you're trying to expose FOR. If you don't want to blow out the illuminated front door, you would have to expose for that and that's going to darken the sky, just as we're seeing in the shots. I don't think there is an exposure issue here... I suppose there *could* be a dynamic range issue but I'm doubtful of that. These are high dynamic-range shots we're looking at and as J-See's processing shows, the exposure can be easily managed/balanced in post'.....</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Horoscope Fish, post: 389111, member: 13090"] Looking at the shots in Post 13 it seems to me they are pretty well exposed, depending on what you're wanting to expose FOR. Lets look at the woman holding the drawing; her face looks perfectly exposed to me. Yes, the pad she's holding is blown out, but if we were to expose for the drawing pad instead, her face would be under-exposed. The shots of the building look well exposed to me as well, depending again on what you're trying to expose FOR. If you don't want to blow out the illuminated front door, you would have to expose for that and that's going to darken the sky, just as we're seeing in the shots. I don't think there is an exposure issue here... I suppose there *could* be a dynamic range issue but I'm doubtful of that. These are high dynamic-range shots we're looking at and as J-See's processing shows, the exposure can be easily managed/balanced in post'. [COLOR=#ffffff]....[/COLOR] [/QUOTE]

Verification