Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2014/10/10
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]The tonality does kind of work and is rather impression. You can tell you are under exposing the hell out of this because you can practically see the filaments in the light bulbs and read the trademarks on them (Sylvania?). I personally feel that in any and all photography there is nothing worse than over exposing and I err on the under exposure side if I'm going to err at all. When look at the monitor at the back of my camera to check my shot im checking for clear well defined light areas and highlights and let the shadows fall where they may. My default is -1 so that perhaps means I'm doing most my shots at not iso 64,000 but 12,800. Large black arias can be easily opened up locally in Photoshop and lightened or just plain optimized. Some of this I can pre do in ACR adobe camera raw before Photoshop even gets opened. My histogram is off to the left but nothings falling off the sides. I tried shooting my older CCD cropped cameras least year when I hurt my wrist in a fall. My D200 and D40X. I'd walk down my dark sidewalks that I walk down every night and point my camera and something and hit the shutter and they would not even go off. I got sold fast on CMOS and full frame. However today I got up at 8 am and have a bright day ahead of me. On 10/10/14 1:48 PM, "Mitch Alland" <mitcha at mac.com> wrote: > I don?t know about laziness, but I think you have a completely different > aesthetic that I am interested in. Take this shot, which is from the series > that I linked: > > https://www.flickr.com/photos/malland/9337150455/in/photostream/lightbox/ > > I suppose that this is one of the pictures that is giving you dyspepsia, > but I > like it a lot: you will notice that all the lighting in this picture comes > from the fluorescent lights on the food stalls in the back of the frame, as > you can see from the shadows on the ground. Of course I could have dodged > the > women in the foreground, but there was no light falling on their faces from > the side I viewed them, and I am happy with how this looks. Actually, the > woman on the right has been dodged by almost one stop. It seems to me that, > beyond a difference in our aesthetics, you haven?t grasped the nature of > the > overall darkness of the scene. > > - - Mitch > > > Subject: [Leica] VSCO Film - and Replichrome as well > From: mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) > Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2014 12:28:30 -0400 > I'm not getting overall blocked shadows on my screen in every shot. But I > am > getting plenty. > I'm getting blocked high areas on more than half of them. > I'm getting a general lack of craft. Hot areas are not burnt down and some > obvious open dark areas are not lightened or optimized. In other words no > local control. > They look like the digital equivalent of machine prints. Untouched by > human > hands... No dodging or burning. On the lists people pride themselves on > this. Its just lazy and shows a laziness in ones command of ones material's > > > On 10/10/14 5:27 AM, "Philippe Amard" <philippe.amard at sfr.fr> wrote: > >> >> Le 10 oct. 2014 ? 11:15, mitcha at mac.com a ?crit : >> >>> (http://bit.ly/1i93new), >> >> All of these are underexposed (blocked shadows) and call for further post >> processing work IMHO, including adjusting those tilts and lists (e.g. the >> last >> one). >> Add to this a need for reframing and punch in some - the first one would >> gain >> from losing the guy on the left hand side for instance, flush of the lady, >> a >> square might work for me. >> I like the people and the colours you got a lot though. >> Hope this helps. >> Amities >> Philippe >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > -- Mark William Rabiner Photographer http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/