Switch to English Language Passer en langue franšaise Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 74,572   Posts: 1,646,600   Online: 1026
      
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 34 of 34
  1. #31

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Aurora, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,081
    "Next, you seem to assume that photography is supposed to provide a realistic and literal reproduction of reality. Not only can it not, but why would you want it to?"

    When I first started out I did want my photographs to provide a realistic and literal reproduction of reality but then I learned that they could not so I learned to foresee what my photographs will look like with the settings that I made. In other words that none of my photographs are real but I know how they look like before I took them.

  2. #32
    SilverGlow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Orange County, Calif
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    739
    Images
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by wiltw View Post
    OK, I have a snowy scene and a polar bear. If I 'shoot to the right', my pixels are all up in the upper range of the histogram. If I did not see the scene, how do I known the pixels truly belong in the upper brightness range, vs down at the lower end? I have a black coal mine scene and a black cat. If I 'shoot to the right', my pixels are all up in the upper range of the histogram. If I did not see the scene, how do I know the pixels truly belong in the upper brightness range, vs down at the lower end?

    The point I am making, on this analog forum, is that a well know reason for use of spot meters allows you to deal with scenes in a manner in which no conventional camera meter will permit, even with the digital crutch of a histogram.



    I don't care that I didn't impress you, because impressing anyone was not the point I was making. The point was that 'placement' is something consciously chosen in the act of exposure, and the spotmeter permits you to do that well, unlike a histogram. I can choose which brightness level in the scene I want at the mid-point, using the spotmeter.
    Your use of the word "crutch" in reference to the use of a histogram is condecending, arrogant, and is noted. Funny, but ALL the pro DSLR shooters at Sports Illustrated, and National Geographic use the histogram...I guess they need a "crutch" yea? Did you learn to be arrogant from Ansel Adams? The histogram is no more a "crutch" the a light meter, or polarizing filter. Please....

    Also, why would anyone with a seasoned experienced eye need a light meter or histogram to determine what part of their scene is the highlights and the shadows? Nobody that has a good eye does. Therefore looking at a snowy scene with a white polar bear or a black scene with a black cat, one readly sees the shadows and the highlights.

    This is not to suggest that light meters and histograms are not needed, by the way.

    A histogram is more valuable for digital because the center of it shows what you told the camera is 18% gray. 2.5 stops to the left are the shadows it will record. 2.5 stops to the right are the highlights. Now spot meter someplace else and you'll notice the histogram changed. So when you see blown highlights on your histogram, nearly anyone can pick out those blown highlights with their human eye, simply by looking at the scene. Same for shadows.
    Coming back home to my film roots. Canon EOS-3 SLR, Canon EOS 1V SLR, 580ex flash, and 5D DSLR shooter. Prime lens only shooter.

  3. #33
    SilverGlow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Orange County, Calif
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    739
    Images
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by Chan Tran View Post
    "Next, you seem to assume that photography is supposed to provide a realistic and literal reproduction of reality. Not only can it not, but why would you want it to?"

    When I first started out I did want my photographs to provide a realistic and literal reproduction of reality but then I learned that they could not so I learned to foresee what my photographs will look like with the settings that I made. In other words that none of my photographs are real but I know how they look like before I took them.
    Do you think that those beautiful scenes Ansel Adam's recorded on silver halide are what he saw? I doubt it, and I suspect what he saw was often very different to what his prints show. This is not a problem for me; I for one prefer a contrived idealized print over the actual scene ;-)
    Coming back home to my film roots. Canon EOS-3 SLR, Canon EOS 1V SLR, 580ex flash, and 5D DSLR shooter. Prime lens only shooter.

  4. #34
    SilverGlow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Orange County, Calif
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    739
    Images
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by wiltw View Post
    Wait, I never said there was no purpose to histograms. I merely stated that histograms show distribution of pixels as captured. Histogram is not as useful for 'placement' but they are useful for seeing that most of the pixels are down in the muddy area or up too high and clipped. You are reading far more into my statements than I ever intended. Please do not continue to assume something of me, unless I state it that way! Especially braggadocio! I will be the first to admit not knowing something.
    How could we think otherwise? You used the word "crutch"...man up? ;-)
    Coming back home to my film roots. Canon EOS-3 SLR, Canon EOS 1V SLR, 580ex flash, and 5D DSLR shooter. Prime lens only shooter.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  Ś   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin