AllanDan wrote:
> The stage shots are very well done, but are not really low-lighting, but
> selective lighting. There is a reason to make the difference. Stage
> spots are actually quite strong, and if you meter for the highlights and
> allow the shadows to fall where they may, you will get little noise
> (digital) or grain (film).
Agreed.
> The noise and grain associated with low-light
> photography is really, in large part, merely due to prolonging the
> exposure time long enough to allow the highlights to invade the shadows.
> They do so in a defused manner that causes weak, grainy shadows.
I don't think this explanation for the observed effect will withstand
scientific scrutiny, but it doesn't matter for your point, as the result
is the same.
>
> Unless one wants grainy, defused shadows as a special effect, one ought
> to meter for the high-lights and forget attempting to give the shadows
> greater detail. A pop of fill-flash is the only way to get more shadow
> detail without running into the problem of noise.
>
> Here is an example of a noiseless shot:
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/10735492@N00/240342415/
>
Nice shot! But I'll have to take your word about the noise in such a
small size version.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|