At 12:04 PM 12/10/2002 -0500, Pschings@xxxxxxx wrote:
In a message dated 12/10/2002 11:46:28 AM Eastern Standard Time,
richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
> I think you're right, as other thread has discussed the (non-)merit of the
> diffusers. Sigh, so we are stuck with a problem with no
> simple solution?
Well, I'm not sure that applying a little exposure compensation isn't a
fairly simple solution. The trick is recognizing the circumstances where
you need to apply it. Almost all of my flash work is done on negative
film, so I'm fairly conservative with the compensation, figuring a little
overexposure is better than underexposure it this situation. I'm also not
afraid to ask my lab to reprint stuff that I think could be done better.
Those minilabs do auto exposure, too, so they'll tend to overexpose the
print if the background is too dark, as well.
Paul, so in this case, I'd turn the exposure compensation to +1 or so?
I am slow here, so let me think it through: since the face is burned-out,
adding more exposure means that the shutter stays open longer, and let more
ambient light in. How's that going to help to un-burn the face?
Or does it work because the background is more exposed so the flash won't
emit as much light? But I thought the flash is triggered at the beginning
of the shutter movement so it can't possibly work this way either....
Arggggghhh.... :-)
Hope this helps,
Paul
// richard <http://www.imagecraft.com>
<http://www.dragonsgate.net/mailman/listinfo>
On-line orders, support, and listservers available on web site.
[ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all previous
replies in your msgs. ]
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|