ebrunner wrote:
thanks, Dave.
You seem to have researched this topic quite extensively and you put forth some compelling arguments. Are we to assume then, if we are shooting RAW, we should be overexposing on purpose in order to gain the full DR that the sensor is capable of? Would this not require that every shot would have to be extensively manipulated to gain acceptable results? Would bracketing a composition not achieve the same result with three or more exposures? Does you technique give us the ability of having enhanced DR without the hassle of multiple shots?
Erich
thanks, Dave. br You seem to have researched thi... (
show quote)
A super bunch of questions, Erich!
First...there is no "overexposure" involved in proper exposure of raw image files! It just seeeeems to the unititiated to be "overexposure" because the image in the camera display screen is washed out an too bright! if it were a jpeg file it WOULD be overexposed. But it's raw, remember? it'll have to be tonally normalized to realize that it was perfectly exposed ( bright enough to almost clip highlights, but not actually do it!)
Second, no one should do anything they'd rather not do!
So, I'll just tell y'what I do ...and why.
In those circumstances that I'm visualizing an image that I suspect I'll want to print, I go th "Full Kaboozka" ...which mean I assure that the maximum available dynamic range of my camera is used up to the point that there is naught but a semi-demi-hemi molecule of space between not clipping and clipping highlights in the raw capture. That's "EBTR with a vengeance" . Why? Because I may want my lab to print the largest possible print with the greatest tonal and chromatic spectra possible at all levels of desired brightness and darkness.
I also go "the Full Kaboozka" if I have the slightest inkling that I might...just...might want ...at some later time...to rethink my initial visualization and follow some other artistically creative path with that image file.
If I'm shooting B.I.F.s with burst exposures i shoot JPEGS. Why? Because JPEGS are what my camera's offernwith long burst sequences. ( that was easy, right?)
If I'm shooting advertizing/promotional images for a client (i don't do that anymore) , it's all Full Kaboozka...EBTR with a Vengeance, because they always seem likely, at some later date, to desire larger prints than they contracted for.
Personally, I find it no trouble to extract my own little 72 ppi jpeg proofs from a raw image file for the client to have that day.
If the family is at the County Fair, the Childrens' museum, a soccer game, or other such event, the snaps of which are destined for the album or grandma's refrigerator door ( which serves beyond simply needing to keep the stuff inside cold...) i shoot jpegs and never look back.
If I'm shooting wildlife from a chosen position or a blind...the whole route..."Full Kaboozka" !
If I'm on the move on foot (with crutches and a monopod that rests in a cup clamped to the lower end of a crutch shaft)
and a folding stool slung over my shoulder.with expectation of naught but slowly changing light I
A. might try to keep ahead of the game by adjusting my EBTR exposure by using the poor man's incident light reading bymetering off my hand (one stop brighter than my gray card (and two an 1/3 stops shy of ETTR... and then add the ERADR of the camera in use. Do it enough and it becomes natural.
or
B. shoot JPEGS with either shutter priority or aperture priority -depending on how fast the intended target species may move into and out of shade and whether that day I'm anal about subject movement or dof.
HDRI? I only rarely have to use it. With the 13 or 14 stop DR for JPEGs of my cameras, and the ERADR of one and 2/3 additional stops of ERADR that each has, it's unusual to need to bracket for HDRI. And if your camera has a jpeg DR OF 12-14 stops and happens to have two full stops of ERADR or more, you'll likely never need HDRI.
so, yeah, I use EBTR whenever possible because image data quality and maximal variety of creative options in pp are important to me. Sure, Ansel did his damndest to GIRIC (Get It Right In Camera) but it is amazing the variety of revisualizations that man could, over a number of years, pull out of an old dry plate or sheet film negative.
There y'go, Erich. If I missed a question, let me know.
Dave