Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/02/17
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Hi Paul, I've been away for awhile and, like you, haven't kept current with this thread. I'm a bit curious between the difference in your double exposure technique to reduce noise and simply making a virtual copy of a single exposure and developing one for the shadows, one for the highlights and blending the two.. Thanks, Bob On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 11:33 AM, Paul Roark <roark.paul at gmail.com> wrote: > Mark, > > > I would never sell my Rolleiflex. Its an old friend. Someday I'll be in a > > full circle mode and start with it and scanning again. > > I'm totally with you there. Actually, the Rolleiflex GX is probably > what I'd go back to before the SL66. The TLR and that 2.8 Planar made > a tremendous and lightweight photographic tool. > > I don't think I've read all the multi-scanning/exposure posts, but I'd > note that with my Sunburst it was a bracketed dual exposure. > > That said, even when shooting the M9, the noise reducing capabilities > of multi-exposures, at the same exposure, have not been very well > described or taken advantage of. However, in my "dual focus" > shooting, I'm starting to take 3 exposures at the same exposure > settings. The first is for the close focus. The second and third (if > there might be a noise problem) are at infinity and fired off in quick > succession without the eye taken from the camera. It may not be as > effective as a plus and minus, HDR-type of bracketing, but the entire > shot is fast, easy to align hand held, and the shadow noise in the > infinty frame is about cut in half. > > Paul > www.PaulRoark.com > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > -- Bob Adler Palo Alto, CA http://www.rgaphoto.com