Jon Tyler Posted April 20, 2022 Share Posted April 20, 2022 (edited) Hey, this is going to seem sort of like a photography question, but I think it is more of an editing question. I also checked about asking this in Kim's group, but it appears there is no button available to ask a question. In Real Estate photography, I have seen mentioned the term "flambient." It has to do with compositing a few pictures of areas with a flash along with the ambient light of the room so as to get good exposure of the outside view of the windows. I have seen and tried this a little bit on a couple of occasions, and I see how it is supposed to work. The question I have is if I am shooting in RAW, and do my proper editing per the RAW class, should I not be able to tease all the available pixels into view without making all the extra images to composite? Then bring everything "to life" in the Levels editing? For reference, here is a YouTube link to the flambient process that I have seen in the past: Edited April 20, 2022 by Jon Tyler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damien Symonds Posted April 20, 2022 Share Posted April 20, 2022 6 minutes ago, Jon Tyler said: The question I have is if I am shooting in RAW, and do my proper editing per the RAW class, should I not be able to tease all the available pixels into view without making all the extra images to composite? Then bring everything "to life" in the Levels editing? Well, yes and no. It's certainly true that way too many people dive straight for these multiple-shot kind of solutions (including HDR) when plain old-fashioned good clean editing will do the job. However, even raw data isn't infallible. It gives you a big tonal range, but it can have blowouts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Tyler Posted April 20, 2022 Author Share Posted April 20, 2022 So, then maybe bracketing the shot (+1/-1 stop along with the normal shot), then if I had to composite, I should have pixels to recover from possibly blown out areas? This seems like it would be a little more practical than carrying all the extra equipment. Then I have a little bit of insurance for any possible clipped pixels, in either direction, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damien Symonds Posted April 20, 2022 Share Posted April 20, 2022 Right. That seems to make sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now