On Thursday, 24 September 2015 20:36:15 UTC+1, dennis@home wrote:
On 24/09/2015 17:31, NY wrote:
"dennis@home" wrote in message
web.com...
On 23/09/2015 13:41, NY wrote:
8

But set against that is the fact that if you *are* willing to learn from
your mistakes, the fact that all your photos are free means that you can
experiment, and you can see instantly which is the right exposure in a
situation where an automatic meter would be fooled. Admittedly, because
the exposure latitude of digital is less (it is very easy to overexpose
and irrecoverably burn out details in the highlights) you *need* to get
the exposure more correct,

Are you shooting in RAW?
I ask because modern digital sensors have a higher dynamic range than
most films available. The range is chopped off to make the JPEGs and
you may then lose shadow or highlight detail. Its where the HDR images
come from, compressing the middle of the range rather than the ends.
If it is consistently over exposed then there is probably a metering
fault.

My compact camera doesn't have the option of shooting in RAW.

I bought one that did and they are difficult to find.

So what is the advantage of RAW, and what is the equivalent in film.
Of course I have a pretty good idea as I know a bit about photography and taking snap shots.


My SLR
does and I have set it to take both JPG and RAW for every photo. I still
underexpose by 1/3 stop on both cameras for the benefit of the JPG, but
I don't think it affects the RAW (I could be wrong on that).

It should affect both but 1/3 of a stop isn't really much unless you are
on the limit.

a 1/3rd of a stop surely with digital this should be expressed as 0.33333
of a stop and what is a stop in digital terms ;-)