Some fun with vacation pics

[mjs1973]

My girlfriend and I spent the last week in the U.P. of Michigan and in Northern WI with our two dogs, Holley and Jinjer. It was so nice to get away and relax for a while. We only had one day planned so we were able to relax, and go and do whatever we wanted for the rest of the week. We took the dogs swimming, and saw a lot of waterfalls. Holley, our 4 year old black lab almost went over aptly named 18 Foot Falls. Other than that, a pretty relaxing week.

I took lots of photos, both digital and film. I'm not thrilled with many of the digitals, but I'm hoping for better results with the film. I actually enjoyed shooting with my film camera more than my digital. Here is a digial compilation that I quickly put together over the weekend. My first attempt at this type of image.

[Lionheart]

Nice sequence, Michael. Looks like you got at least one great picture-what were you not thrilled about? Sounds like you had a pretty good time, and that's more important than great pictures, unless, of course, you went specifically for picture taking
Looking forward to seeing some of the film shots.
Leon

[mjs1973]

Thanks Leon, we did have a good time, and that's what we were there for. I think my biggest dissapointment with the pics is from the limited latitude of digital. I know digital has about the same latitude as the slide film I was shooting, but the highlights seem to blow out much easier with digital. I shoot RAW so I'm able to adjust them after the fact if I don't like what I got. That helps, but I would much rather get it right at the point of capture. I think the instant feedback from digital is great, but I just hate seeing half my image exposed the way I want it, and the other half blinking on my LCD. I really hope that the camera companies can improve the latitude of the digital sensor instead of seeing how many megapixels they can cram into one. Just one more thing to add to the learning curve I guess. Oh well, I'm not giving up my digital, but I sticking with the film too.

[another view]

but the highlights seem to blow out much easier with digital. I shoot RAW so I'm able to adjust them after the fact

Sounds like you had a good time, dogs and all! If the highlights are blown, there's no data there (by definition). The blown pixels have values of 255, 255, 255 in R, G and B so they're just white. RAW won't bring back blown highlights, and won't increase the latitude of the sensor. And yes, my experience has been the same - similar exposure latitude to slide film but the highlights blow out faster.

A little bit of blown highlights or blocked up shadows (the opposite of blown highlights) isn't always a bad thing, either. If you tried to get all that data to fit inside the histogram you might have a flat-looking image, especially if there's any amount of contrast to the light.

However, using RAW can help you limit some problems. I have noticed during conversion that if I move the exposure slider around the amount of blown highlights can change. I think this has to do with moving it up, for example, one stop - and having more areas blown because that's what you'd see if you shot it that way. Move the slider all the way to under exposure and it still won't be able to bring back the pixels that were blown at time of capture. Just a slight amount of exposure control at time of conversion can make a big difference (I'm talking about less than a 1/3 stop).

[mjs1973]

You're right Steve, once they are gone, they are gone for good, but a slight adjustment can make a big differance. Here are a few more from the trip. The first one it the fall Holley almost went over. The last pic is from 2 dif. exposures.