Ron
Moderator Emeritus
Why the Panasonic FX20? Why not the FX30. I have been researching what I would like to get and so far the FX30 looks to be a great improvement over the FX20.
Ron said:Why the Panasonic FX20? Why not the FX30.? I have been researching what I would like to get and so far the FX30 looks to be a great improvement over the FX20.
Karl said:Ron,
. . . always overexposed to maintain the shadow detail and give more color saturation. Like you said, if the detail isn't there to begin with, there's nothing you can do in the darkroom or in the software to create it. I don't think manipulation is cheating; photography is an art form and not a science, and you should be able to use whatever tools are at your disposal.
Congratulations!
Ron from Big D said:I have attached the winning photo
Karl, seems to me the injunction is: expose for highlights, develop for shadows--or, was it the other way around. I haven't done film for years, and I can't recall this correctly.
Karl said:Doug,
No; you've got it right. The only problem is that, aside from b/w photography, you have little (if any) control over the development process of the film. It's all done by time and temperature and you don't see the results until it's done.
Ron from Big D said:Doug:
One comment related to exposing for the highlights and noise in the shadows. With digital, you shoot two identical shots, on tripod without changing anything except exposure, and you can lay one on top of the other and then mask out what you don't want. In other words, expose a shot for highlights to get all the texture and then expose another to get the detail in the dark areas. Obviously it requires time and most likely a tablet to get it accurate. It's very difficult to mask properly with the mouse.