This is a public-interest archive. Personal data is pseudonymized and retained under GDPR Article 89.

Potential Problem

<I would like to ask a question here. I presently have a cheap digital camera - not only cheap, but also about four
years old, which is old in the digital world - there have been many improvements in the last four years, I believe....

I'm having trouble with the digital camera in regard to contrast: it doesn't handle light and darkness well at all.
I think I'm using the right words here (I hope so). For instance, I cannot get a decent photograph of a dark plant,
or a very light plant. I can't even get a usable photograph of a very dark plant.

So I really have two choices: return to using my film camera (which equals happiness for me, but also equals
paying for film and developing) or invest in a better digital camera.

Do better digitals handle this contrast better? Or is this a flaw of all/most of them?

I don't want to invest in a better digital>

I have to jump in here to point out that color management is a huge, huge issue that it doesn't look like anyone is addressing. Color management is basically the process of insuring that the colors that your camera or scanner sees and captures are the same as what your cpu runs through its processes and then are the same as your monitor displays and then are the same as your printer prints or your final output device outputs and were the same as the original subject. This is why they all have to be calibrated on a regular basis using a good calibration software and devices that will insure that we are all looking at and using the same numbers when we talk about a particular color.

I say numbers, because as you might have heard somewhere, all we are looking at when we look at our monitors is the end result of a mathematical calculation.

Your camera may indeed be the problem if it is an older variety & the type of pixels and how they are assembled and then processed within the camera's software just may be the source of the poor quality you are seeing. Or maybe not. If your monitor is not calibrated, or is simply old (which is more than 18-24 months, as no monitor is reliable for color after that point), then that may be the problem.

"Better Digital"? I hate to be the bearer of bad news, and I am really not a technical person, believe me, but just buying a "better" camera, whatever that is, might help resolve your issues, but unless you learn and apply some of the more involved aspects of digital photography, you will always be plagued by these problems. You like digital because you can save the money you would otherwise spend on film & processing. Please realize this:Digital is waaaaaaaay more expensive than film! Between the equipment cost and the time you need to spend, you will be out of pocket alot more with digital than film, unless you are willing to settle for garbage coming out of your computer. Having said that, I will also say that it is worth it, in the long run, but it is a very long run.

Think of it like this. I am capable of cooking a 1/4 pound meat patty, similar to how it is served at McDonald's. I have a job catering a fine dinner for several of my city's top politicians and businessmen. Filet Mignon is on the menu. Will a better frying pan do the trick for me?

Rich Pomerantz
rich@richpomerantz.com
www.richpomerantz.com
(860)355-3356




_______________________________________________
gardenwriters mailing list
gardenwriters@lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/gardenwriters

GWL has searchable archives at:
http://www.hort.net/lists/gardenwriters

Send photos for GWL to gwlphotos@hort.net to be posted
at: http://www.hort.net/lists/gwlphotos

Post gardening questions/threads to
&quot;Gardenwriters on Gardening&quot; &lt;gwl-g@lists.ibiblio.org&gt;

For GWL website and Wiki, go to
http://www.ibiblio.org/gardenwriters

Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index