Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/01/22

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] 20D B&W
From: daniel.ridings at (Daniel Ridings)
Date: Sat Jan 22 11:51:50 2005
References: <002401c50082$b1f3caa0$>

Forgive my simply questions again ...

Burning in ... would you be using a similar technique that Phong uses to
get rid of the blue in his snow, only other adjustments rather than color

In my case, I think it was the last scenario you mention below.

During my skating shoot last weekend I forgot to put the camera back on
manual for one team. I had been shooting something else and didn't have to
worry about the ice. The shots with _only_ ice background suffer from
underexposure and the noise was beyond help.

Interesting though ... if there was the slightest bit of bleachers in the
shot, the matix meter took care of it and those shots turned out just
fine. Otherwise I just run on manual. It's not like the lighting in an
ice-rink changes very much.


On Sat, 22 Jan 2005, B. D. Colen wrote:

> That depends upon a number of things, Daniel - The first is, of course,
> the size of the print. The second is the quality of the printer. And the
> third is what you do to those areas in terms of dodging and burning. If
> you have an underexposed, noisy area without detail you want or need to
> keep, you can eliminate the noise/grain by burning it in. But if you're
> looking at an image at 50-66-100% on screen and see it as noisy, but
> then printing it at a fraction of that, you may not see any more noise
> than you would see grain in a film image, and therefore don't notice it.
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> [] On Behalf Of
> Daniel Ridings
> Sent: Saturday, January 22, 2005 12:09 AM
> To: Leica Users Group
> Subject: RE: [Leica] 20D B&W
> But BD ... how much of that noise is seen in a print?
> I have some really noisy files but when they are printed out you can't
> even find it. I just noticed that recently.
> When I edit the files in fullsize on the screen I think "that will look
> really bad". But when I print them out, I just don't see it anymore.
> Daniel
> On Fri, 21 Jan 2005, B. D. Colen wrote:
> > I think that it looks better, Slobodan, because "grain" is more
> > acceptable in bw - and because the noise isn't seen as color speckles.
> >
> > One way to reduce noise in low light - to answer Adam's question - is
> > to routinely OVER expose by about 1/3 ev in order to make sure that
> > you don't UNDER expose. I know this runs counter to all the digital
> > advice - expose digital like slide film, exposing for the highlights.
> > At 1/3 ev over you're unlikely to really blow out the highlights, and
> > you're less likely to underexpose. And underexposure causes a huge
> > increase in noise.
> >
> > Ironically, however I am absolutely convinced that there is more
> > detail in the shadows in digital exposed in low light than there is
> > film. I have seen this time and time again.
> >
> > B. D.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:
> > [] On Behalf
> > Of Slobodan Dimitrov
> > Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 3:38 PM
> > To: Leica Users Group
> > Subject: Re: [Leica] 20D B&W
> >
> >
> > I did notice that on color.
> > But just yesterday I tried it on a BW image with much better results.
> > S. Dimitrov
> >
> >
> > On Jan 21, 2005, at 10:43 AM, B. D. Colen wrote:
> >
> > > True...But the shadow/highlights feature, as fabulous as it is at
> > > salvaging disasters, has drawbacks - one being that it tends to
> > > increase noise in dark areas opened up.
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See for more information
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See for more information

Replies: Reply from bdcolen at (B. D. Colen) ([Leica] 20D B&W)
In reply to: Message from bdcolen at (B. D. Colen) ([Leica] 20D B&W)