56762Re: RAW dynamic range extraction
- Jul 11, 2013Am 11.07.2013 15:41, schrieb Jeff:
> > Classical photography doesn't have to cope with the problems panorama photography has.Not a different level, but different problems. I agree with all he says,
> Erik, I disagree with this statement, we are all (I assume) trying to
> achieve the best quality we can from our images, are we not? I cannot
> perceive why you would think that "Classical" photography would
> require a different level of quality compared to panoramic images.
only that he doesn't speak about the specific problems we have: We need
to expose all images for a panorama the same, and we shoot in all
directions: against the sun, where there likely are deep shadows and
with the sun in the back where there are no shadows at all.
A classical photographer won't shoot in those directions if he can
avoid. And if he does he'll use this as creative effect.
We want to show anything around, including deep shadows and bright
highlights. Hence we have the problem to compensate for that. He says
ACR 2012 is not the best, better use 2010 and underexpose. But if we do
so we loose shadows we need so much. And if he says Aperture does it
better, well, why not? I can't judge. Your're welcome to write an
article about Aperture.
> Sorry nearly forgot - I "assume" he is using ACR 8.1 in his video, asDefinitely not. The page is from May, ACR 8.1 came out in June.
> he states he tries all the Raw convertors, and he is usually right up
> to date, but I could be wrong.
> I have tried ACR 8.1 myself and it seems to suffer from the same problems, but hey! try it yourself.I didn't find the greying of overexposed skin (or the cyan tones of
overexposed sky) which is a problem in other raw converters and I was
very happy about that. What problems are you talking about?
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>