Google| Subject | Re: post processing |
| From | YouDontNeedToKnowButItsNoëlle |
| Date | 03/16/2014 14:23 (03/16/2014 14:23) |
| Message-ID | <lg48kn$tpc$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | David Taylor |
| Followups | David Taylor (1h & 12m) > YouDontNeedToKnowButItsNoëlle |
Le 16/03/14 13:10, David Taylor a écrit :
David TaylorI think it is quite rare to have incorrect exposure nowadays, and this is far rarer than having improper WB. Or just, not-so-pleasing WB. Some cameras have a tendency to overexpose, but it is easily fixed with a slight underexposure on camera.
I can and do use post-processing on some images, and JPEG is quite adequate for my usage. A lot of talk here seems to be from people who use RAW images in case their exposure is incorrect.
When I need jpg for immediate use, well I batch process the raw "as is", just adding size and quality reduction to fit use. This is no more work.
Doing a lot of stage shots in dark conditions, I have use of the extra dynamic range given by raw (I hate washed spots). And I appreciate to be able to use Dfine filter for the iso noise, instead of the build-in. For the rest, I must admit I like post-processing. Dry lab.
Noëlle Adam
03/13/2014-
-
-
