wrote:
I did not see any comments from you about what the end product
looked like. If you don't see the difference in the end product, then
I suggest that you are getting far too hung up on the technical aspects
of photography and missing the real real core of the subject the art of
photography. You are letting the tools dictate the results not your
heart.

Well, it wasn't a controlled experiment. And I didn't take the picture
- I was just observing all this long after the fact.

A better test along the lines of what you say is my taking two pictures
- one where it seems half of the image is clipped, and one where I
reduce the exposure until none of what I care for is clipped, and see if
the latter kept the detail as well as the former.

In this case, BTW, there was a lot of detail in the photo that was
captured where the camera indicated clipped highlights. Fortunately for
the one who took the picture, the detail was irrelevant, which is why he
didn't bother taking another one after seeing the fake clipped highlights.

I can see why a camera manufacturer may have included it just to point
out to users that "this area is very, very bright". I just hope that in
future, cameras make this configurable, so that I can select what I
consider to be "too bright".

--
"I'm a lawyer." "Honest?" "No, the usual kind."


/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z

anl