Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2011/07/19
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On Jul 19, 2011, at 2:12 PM, Richard Man wrote: > So with all these war stories about shooting the particular subject in > question (indoor architecture with mixed lighting), does digital make > it easier? I can't imagine it does inherently as sensors have similar > limitations as film; that they are limited in their spectral > responses? The digital sensor does a "better" job of rendering multiple Kelvin temperatures. (by better I mean not as garish a contrast between various K sources) than transparency film balanced for either 3,200, 3,400 or 5,000K. The digital RAW file also allows for changing the K temperature in post processing. Though the real "save" comes in the post processing software (see Tina's link to what appears to be fantastic software). A professional will still do their best to achieve a workable color balance in the RAW file at the time exposure; though with the knowledge that minor discrepancies can be dealt with in post; before handing the file over to the art director. When you're handing a transparency to the art director everything had to be perfect "in the camera" on that one sheet of film (if you wanted him or her to ever hire you again). Simply stated - far more flexibility in terms of color balance contrast dynamic range color rendering post processing with a digital file than with a transparency. Regards, George Lottermoser george at imagist.com http://www.imagist.com http://www.imagist.com/blog http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist