Previous / Next
IMAGES FROM THE BLOG
Saturday, February 19, 2005
I did a couple of tests where I shot an area of my wall which was
fairly dark moving into a lighter area with some objects both at 400
ISO under exposed one stop, and at 800 exposed normally. I then
used the Photoshop RAW converter with luminance smoothing at 25, and
color noise reduction at 40, and pushed the exposure on the
underexposed 400 shot 1.0.
The highlights actually looked better in the "pushed" version.
The shadow detail was every so slightly better, probably not to the
point that you would notice it in a print at the normal 800 ISO.
I could post a bit of clip from each, but I doubt if you could tell the
difference, it is that subtle. However, what is interesting is
that if you do shoot at 400 underexposed, you get a smaller file, and
hence quicker write times etc. It might be worth doing it for
I did a more controlled test on a tripod with 800 under exposed and
1600 exposed normally. I put them up on the screen tiled, side by
side, looking at each at the pixel level: I can't see any difference at
all. I don't care for the look of the stuff once you get past
400. In general, I shoot 200 whenever I can.
The site seems to slowly be morphing into a newspaper format. I
wish there was a way to have a sort of editorial aspect to the blog,
where some posters could post directly into the blog on their
own. There are versions of blog software that allow this, but
they are expensive, and would mean redoing the whole thing. My
site is hosted on a Win2x server and I'm not going to move it. I
began writing on this site in 1999. I don't know if blogs even
existed at that time. I kept templates for each month and added
stuff as I went along.
That's another thing I miss. I would rather have a page which
starts at the beginning, say of the week and runs down so you can
follow the progression. Maybe this is old fashioned but I would
like to be able to post that way.
I'm perfectly willing to put a link to the older blog stuff and start afresh.
Oh, and the blog tool I'm using now is Radioland which posts static
pages via ftp to the webserver. It's not bad, but as I say, it is
missing some features. The comments via Haloscan; again, they're
okay, but I would like to have the reader be able to see the last few
lines of the comment as a header so they know if anything new has been
I've been doing some more research, and turns out that there may be a way to do multi-author stuff in Radioland. Multi-author.