Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/04/20

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

Subject: [Leica] Picture of the Year Controversy
From: nod at bouncing.org (Philip Clarke)
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 01:45:32 +0100
References: <C61265F9.4D1CD%mark@rabinergroup.com> <49ECF191.9050208@bouncing.org> <36172e5a0904201715q3f7b624at69056c7907aaccbc@mail.gmail.com>

Thank you for the explanation, as I read the articles on shooting to the 
right it appears that one must be experienced enough to know when there 
is detail in the overexposed areas that will still be captured (I'm not 
that experienced) and retrieved using the RAW data by then 
"underexposing"  from the suggested values (this is based on some tests 
and articles on ACR), regardless I do acknowledge the immense skill 
involved to manipulate an image in this way and to avoid clipping.

As to whether the image is suitable for a front page, in the UK there 
are regularly mainpulated images from politicians heads stuck on 
derogatory bodies to touched up photos of starlets on the front pages. 
This I find disappointing.

Geoff Hopkinson wrote:
> Exposing to the right is better defined as using more of the brighest stop
> to capture a larger range of tones or to use as much of your dynamic range
> as possible. The intent is to capture the widest possible range of tones so
> that the image is more robust when all of the following manipulation is
> performed. That may or may not be the best practical technique, dependant 
> on
> your purpose.  Over-exposing may result in clipping. You may be able to
> recover some of that information if one or more channels are not clipped,
> but you may lose accuracy by doing that. It is a recovery technique not an
> aim. In fact most accomplished photographers on this list that regularly
> show their work choose to slightly under-expose rather than risk clipping.
> All Raw files need some conversion before you can view them at all.
> Typically a large gamma curve is applied to approximate our perception in
> any case. A linear conversion will show you a very dark, flat image. The
> idea of any particular 'default' conversion beyond that being the only
> correct standard is invalid. For example any default conversion based on
> approximating a camera's default jpeg output will typically crush the darks
> and highlights and increase the saturation and contrast for impact.
> This particular interesting issue that Tina has introduced seems to me to 
> be
> about interpretation of the rules by the judges and entrants. For my taste
> these shots appear un-natural but very effective and striking images. 
> Simply
> one viewer's opinion.Whether they fit someone's idea of  photojournalism is
> rather a different aspect. Were they to appear as front page reporting, I
> think that it has been recently established that the photographer would get
> fired.
> 2009/4/21 Philip Clarke <nod at bouncing.org>
>
>   
>> He almost certainly "shoots to the right" (I believe this is the 
>> expression
>> used to indicate over-exposing and using the RAW headroom),.....
>> Philip.
>>
>>
>> --
>>     
>>> Cheers
>>> Geoff
>>> 'Breathe In, Breathe Out, Move On'
>>> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/gh/a/
>>> http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman
>>>
>>>       
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>   



In reply to: Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] Picture of the Year Controversy)
Message from nod at bouncing.org (Philip Clarke) ([Leica] Picture of the Year Controversy)
Message from hopsternew at gmail.com (Geoff Hopkinson) ([Leica] Picture of the Year Controversy)