Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/10/09
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]No mud inside Tina - seems clear to me. I share the same experience with the L1 (Digilux 3 cousin on the Matsushita branch of the family tree, this might be why) as you with the M8. I consequently and deliberately underexpose (through compensation, ie. shorter times/faster speed most of the times) until I can get the highlights acceptable. Back home, LR or SilkPix do the job for me when I want to restaure some light in the shadows. Where I don't understand your explanation of underexposure is when you say you measure light on the shadows, the road or the grass. From my understanding, this would result in overexposure of the highlights.. In fact, if I measured light on the shadows, the skies would be over-exposed i.e. for me burnt out and white - for ever. And even if LR can do things, I find it is better at getting light out of the shadows, than dimming already too clear highlights. But maybe under and over exposure don't mean the same to everyone here, depending on their mother tongue; I really DK. This technique (i.e. only bothering to get the highlights within range) often times works, sometimes not. But I find it a nice makeshift for situations when: a) contrast is out the sensor range, (Barcelona narrow streets where in this respect "terrible" with shadow areas at ground level, and clear clothes hanging in the sunshine up above) b) noise at high ISO is an issue - I find I control noise better by "pushing up " the light in LR or SP than by shooting at nominal, normal higher ISO value requested by the darkness of a scene. It seems to me we share the same point of view, unless I'm totally mistaken about your. Which might put the Digillux 3 and the L1 , together with the M8 , at variance with other digicams. Thanks for this nice technical, but so informative and friendly thread Yours Phil...x Tina Manley wrote: > At 12:33 AM 10/9/2007, you wrote: > >> confusion is result of not kowing what camera type Tina is referring >> to in each bit of her sentences - I tried to construe some >> explanation and posted my answer for Tina to confirm, or deny. >> Waiting then. >> Yours >> Phil...x > > > According to my experience and everything I've read, all other digital > cameras benefit by overexposing slightly - histogram should be heavy > on the right. The Leica M8 is different because Leica changed the way > shadows and highlights are compressed. The highlights have less > information and the shadows have more. Leica has always been > well-known for how well they handle shadows so this was a conscious > decision on their part. They had to compress something and they chose > to compress the highlights. So with the M8 you want to underexpose > slightly to keep from blowing out those shadows that have less detail > than the shadows. Histogram should be heavy on the left. I usually > accomplish this by exposing for the shadows, but sometimes I also > underexpose. I do always underexpose rather than using high ISOs with > the M8. > > Clear as mud? > > Tina > > Tina Manley > ASMP, NPPA, EP, PI > http://www.tinamanley.com > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >