| Subject: | Re: [OM] velvia exposure |
|---|---|
| From: | Roger Wesson <roger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 21 Jul 2003 20:24:09 +0100 |
Underexposed, I reckon - it's much more able to hold shadow detail than
highlight, and Velvia with the highlights blown looks really bad.
Roger Richard Smith wrote: With Velvia, if one can't get it exactly right, which is better - a little overexposed or a little underexposed? < 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 > |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | RE: [OM] Between 18mm and 35mm, Timpe, Jim |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | RE: [OM] Between 18mm and 35mm, Walt Wayman |
| Previous by Thread: | [OM] velvia exposure, Richard Smith |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [OM] velvia exposure, Andrew L Wendelborn |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |