"Exposing to the right" is over exposed, what now?
in [Photoshop]
|
From: Hilarity Ensues on 9 Oct 2009 17:05 On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 10:44:52 -0800, floyd(a)apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote: > >And do note that later today I'll post an extensive analysis >of each, showing exactly what can be understood from them. Oh, this is going to be good. Let me go get some popcorn, and a milkshake. So when I laugh real hard the milkshake will come streaming out of my nose.
From: Porte Rouge on 9 Oct 2009 18:02 On Oct 8, 3:04 pm Floyd L. Davidson wrote "which is ridiculous!" It is. My apologies. I miss aligned the thread and saw the other link. Also, I could not see that all the messages in the thread were being forwarded. Google Groups hides them in the posts. Porte
From: Charles on 9 Oct 2009 18:06 A link for your enjoyment. http://www.rags-int-inc.com/PhotoTechStuff/ETTR/
From: John McWilliams on 9 Oct 2009 18:07 Kyle D. wrote: > > (To enlighten the ignorant: There is zero difference in the amount of noise > in a 2 minute exposure in low light and a 1/2000s exposure in bright light. > Photons are photons. If you collect enough to get over the base > noise-threshold then all those parts of the image that are properly exposed > will be noise-free in any image, no matter the initial light levels.) Bzzzzt! Flat out wrong. -- lsmft
From: Wilba on 9 Oct 2009 22:54
Paul Furman wrote: > > An interesting related issue I don't understand is how the exposure slider > works in Lightroom or ACR. I don't know how to duplicate that effect in > photoshop with curves, levels, etc. Those all do like you describe, moving > the middle parts of the histogram but there isn't an easy way I can see to > shift the whole exposure. Hmm, the middle slider on levels comes close but > still doesn't match the effect. Image | Adjustments | Exposure... ? |