DSLR

[Michael Zacherl]

On Mar 29, 2008, at 3:12 PM, Gert van Santen wrote:

>> Gert's gallery is a good example
>
> Thanks, Martin. Some pictures needed a
> lot of denoising and other tricks,
> though, and as soon as you start
> pixel-peeping, you will find horrible
> artefacts. For the internet many
> pictures are still very useable, though.

That's also a point:
When cropped and resized, after some (sometimes serious)  
postprocessing I get results I like.
The balance between highlights and shadows and low light conditions  
appear to be the biggest problems with the average compacts.
I just don't want to photoshop almost every shot I did.
I didn't do that in the analogue world either (of course that was much  
more of an effort back then).

> I started to write a response to the
> first e-mail in this thread, but after
> 20 lines I deleted the whole thing
> because I thought you (Martin) said it
> very well when you wrote: "Which one is
> more important to you: Portability or
> image quality?"


I talked to Eric today. He was doing a lot of photographing quite some  
time ago.
Now it's portability he wants. And listening to myself - although I  
certainly do fancy units like the D300 - but it's the weight and size  
I'd like to minimise.

Bear with me, I still gotta make up my mind   ;-)


--
feed your perception: http://blauwurf.at

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.music-bar.org/private.cgi/shelter-music-bar.org/attachments/20080401/e987918f/attachment.htm