Nice colors and that second one is great!
These are nice. My Mom grew Irises.
Thanks all, glad you it.
Smoke, considering your earlier question from this week. Take the 2nd photo as an example. There's nothing about the light (extremely flat overcast) or the subject brightness that would indicated anything other than a normal metered exposure. Had I taken the photo then following the camera meter indication (zero meter) I could expect a well exposed JPEG.
Instead I exposed at +1.3 stops above the meter's zero point. Here's the photo above set side by side with the JPEG SOOC (on right).
View attachment 139806
I'll call that JPEG overexposed. The highlights aren't clipped but it has a blown red channel. And here's the histogram for the raw file.
View attachment 139807
I added the magenta line to indicate the sensor's highlight threshold. I could have squeezed another 1/3 stop of exposure onto that and I should have. So a perfect raw file exposure would have been at +1.6 stops above the meter's zero indication. So this is my new Fuji X-T2 and this is consistently what I've been getting. A different camera manufacturer/designer will be different, but they're all chicken to some degree.
A further note: In the case of this photo it really does matter. It was gloomy outside to the point of on/off drizzle. I had a tripod but it was windy enough that I had to get the shutter speed up. Arguably into the macro range I shot at f/8 but would have preferred to shoot at f/11. So I'm in a forced raise the ISO situation -- I took the photo at ISO 3200. If I had gone with the camera's meter and targeted their JPEG processor I would have been reducing a high ISO raw file exposure by at least a stop and that is a seriously bad idea.
Joe