![]() ClamWin Free Antivirus 0.97.6 (18-10-2012): A free antivirus, GNU GPL Open Source Virus Scanner (Windows Freeware).Avira AntiVir Personal (18-10-2012): Free anti-virus and anti-spyware on-demand scanner, detects and removes more than 50000 viruses and trojans (Windows Freeware).So, yes, there are tons of effects that are digital only. ![]() I'm not sure what the question regarding special features that can be achieved with post processing means, but once you get into digital manipulation, the only limit is you imagination. Again, just for me, I correct on the camera and don't use the filter I correct again in RAW conversion for the final tweaks. You will always get better effects and control with the actual filter.įor major color corrections like fluorescent, you have to make the call whether letting more light in and controlling the color temperature in camera or post is better than filtering with a pretty high filter-factor piece of glass. Any attempt to emulate this in post processing is just that: emulation. A circular polarizer is much more interesting, as it actually modifies which light arrives at the sensor. This debate rages on, but the difference between images shot with and without are (to my eye) negligible. I should say, I use a UV filter mostly as plain glass to protect the lens. You might be an image purist, and if so, you'd want to do your filtration on the lens. I find the data loss does not impact the final image quality, so for me, bringing the extra filters is pointless. I used to take a heap of filters with me, but now I only bring a few specialized ones: circular polarizing, star, ND. By applying a filter in post, you necessarily reduce the amount of data in your image.ĭoes the difference matter? Your mileage may vary. You will expose after filtration, allowing your sensor to collect the maximum amount of data. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |