On 27/07/2015 13:20, michael adams wrote:
"dennis@home" wrote in message
web.com...
On 27/07/2015 10:07, michael adams wrote:

The histogram and burnt out high/low lights are two of the most useful things on a
digital camera. Without them you a reliant on the metering system and they vary a
lot.
Once you understand them you use them rather than the metering for almost any shot
other than idiot mode.

Which probably accounts for the fact that all photographs taken by
cameras without histogram displays - any taken more than say 20
years ago say at a guess - are all rubbish.

Even with film the metering will get it right some of the time and you can do a lot of
corrections post processing even with film (dodging, burning in, etc.). Of course
exposure bracketing was quite common on upmarket film cameras in an attempt to make
better photos. these days you can still bracket but as the sensors have a wider dynamic
range you can quite often shoot in RAW and recover as much info as film gives even with
a two or three stop exposure error.

Er sorry, but haven't you just contradicted yourself there?

er no!


If, as "the sensors have a wider dynamic range you can quite often shoot
in RAW and recover as much info as film gives even with a two or three
stop exposure error." - where does the need for a histogram come in ?

And if as you claim, digital has wider dynamic range than film,
then it seems that rather than them all producing rubbish, they
really were masters after all. Unlike todays gadget junkies.

What if its four stops?