Latest detailsâ„¢ v.Acrylic Jett

Notice how in the digital picture, you can see every individual brick of the brick facade, more individual blades of grass on the grass plant, the actual texture of the concrete driveway, more detail in the rims of the car, the true size of the flowers, etc. Why? A histogram tells the story.



Original digital:



1052001_AudiS4_side.jpg




Brightness and Contrast enhanced. Notice how much brighter, more reflective the paint looks at the expense of detail. No accusations, just facts.



Audi.jpg




For your reading pleasure if you are unfamiliar with histograms: http://www.pcworld.com/howto/article/0,aid,120600,00.asp
 
Interesting article. I have never even heard of a histogram. Thanks. Wish my digital had one, but alas...
 
thx for that article, now i know what that graph thing is on my camera.



Tasty: the wheels on your lexus aren't that bad, they are just different and reminiscent of hub caps on a buick. I love the car though, it's a classic.
 
I don't know whether it is the camera work or the detailing, but as always I am impressed. I often come to autopia just to see if Scott has posted. Keeps me pumped up about detailing.
 
TW85 HHI said:
Notice how in the digital picture, you can see every individual brick of the brick facade, more individual blades of grass on the grass plant, the actual texture of the concrete driveway, more detail in the rims of the car, the true size of the flowers, etc. Why? A histogram tells the story.



For your reading pleasure if you are unfamiliar with histograms: http://www.pcworld.com/howto/article/0,aid,120600,00.asp
Click to expand...



Interesting article. The film picture is still more accurate to the actual available light. I also adjust my camera for a more accurate exposure if the background is brighter than the vehicle I am shooting (the other way if it is a white vehicle). What is done during processing is beyond my control. Both the digital picture and the print picture were resized, compressed and jpg quality reduced with the pro version of the image optimizer at www.xat.com but the print picture was compressed a bit more since the file size at 1800 x 1200 was larger.



BTW, I think I can check the histrogram of both print and digital pictures with the xat program....EDIT...I can.



35mm



105histogram_35mm.jpg




Digital



105histogram_digital.jpg




I guess I need to adjust the camera a bit more to equalize it out a bit...however, the background was quite bright still and much more like the print film vs digital image.
 
Your histograms show that your print photo is overexposed whereas the digital has better balance. You do not want peaks at or near the extreme ends of the histogram.
 
TW85 HHI said:
Your histograms show that your print photo is overexposed whereas the digital has better balance. You do not want peaks at or near the extreme ends of the histogram.
Click to expand...



The digital may be better balanced but it is still less accurate since the background was a lot brighter than it is in the digital shot. I was very suprised when I first saw how dark the pictures were. :nixweiss
 
Scott,



It is simple. A longer shutter speed or a lower aperture will produce a brighter image. Lighter areas will appear brighter than darker areas such as you observe with the background versus the car. It doesn't mean a particular picture is a better representation of what was actually being pictured.
 
I almost always shoot in automatic mode. Now that I have figured out how to adjust for a brigher background that should help keep it from looking washed out. Kind of tough when I do so many black cars (4 today...2 of them in the direct sun!) and lately we've had nothing but sunny skies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top