06-27-2011, 05:53 PM
[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1309190633' post='9585']
Depending on the sensor technology level, yes of course, you are right. I tend to dislike a high dynamic range though, I always find myself making images a bit more contrasty instead <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />...
People tend to like contrast, me included. So a high dynamic range only would benefit corrections in post processing, mostly. After that we lower the dynamic range again.
[/quote]
That's not relevant to the original post though. High dynamic range would benefit precisely the photographs in the thread linked above. The histograms in those photographs would have peaks (EDIT: I mean several peaks per photo) to the leftmost and rightmost parts of the graph.
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutoria...grams1.htm (EDIT: In particular, look at the coastal photo histogram.)
Depending on the sensor technology level, yes of course, you are right. I tend to dislike a high dynamic range though, I always find myself making images a bit more contrasty instead <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />... People tend to like contrast, me included. So a high dynamic range only would benefit corrections in post processing, mostly. After that we lower the dynamic range again.
[/quote]
That's not relevant to the original post though. High dynamic range would benefit precisely the photographs in the thread linked above. The histograms in those photographs would have peaks (EDIT: I mean several peaks per photo) to the leftmost and rightmost parts of the graph.
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutoria...grams1.htm (EDIT: In particular, look at the coastal photo histogram.)