[Etrsi_645]

Hi,

Am I mistaken or am I getting a slight pasty look--almost posterized--to slightly overexposed skin tones and clothes. Not enough overexposure to cause the 255-blinking, but enough to goo up those effected tones...and they don't recover well in Lightroom.. anyone else experienced this? I don't have an immediate example, but can find one if need be..

[Giklab]

I'm interested. Please do post a sample. I assume this is in raw and therefore not a result of some jpeg setting?

[sTi]

Hi,

Am I mistaken or am I getting a slight pasty look--almost posterized--to slightly overexposed skin tones and clothes. Not enough overexposure to cause the 255-blinking, but enough to goo up those effected tones...and they don't recover well in Lightroom.. anyone else experienced this? I don't have an immediate example, but can find one if need be..

My guess is that a single (RGB) color channel (most likely red) is clipped. This single channel clipping also leads to loss of information that usually cannot be recovered. Therefore, you always have to look out for clipping in all channels (not only luminosity) to avoid loss of information. This is especially important when e.g. photographing red flowers. With those, the red channel usually starts to clip a loooong time before luminosity even gets close to clipping. This leads to the common phenomenon that the flowers look like undifferentiated red "blobs"

For recovery you might give Raw Therapee, a free Raw converter, a try. IMO its recovery algorithms (especially "blend" and "color propagation") are second to none. It also offers a Raw data histogram that shows if actual Raw sensor data is clipped.

[Etrsi_645]

I'm interested. Please do post a sample. I assume this is in raw and therefore not a result of some jpeg setting?

Actually, it probably is a JPEG setting. I notice it on the JPEG camera screen, but not in the raw file. Though the raw file does seem to have a much shorter span of adjustment range in the highlights in LightRoom before the image goes goody...