Depends on how far overexposed. If you get just overexposed enough that it doesn't clip the highlights, that's actually the ideal exposure with digital. If you clip your highlights, though, they're gone forever.

Underexposures don't clip quite so hard, but they're noisy and the nature of digital exposure means they won't have as much detail as the highlights. So they're salvageable, but they'll look like crap.

>>783126

Nice. thanx

>>783130

what, you were serious?

>Underexposures don't clip quite so hard

Er, well Nikon underexposures don't clip quite so hard. Canon underexposures don't clip at all! Very minor point. Not a troll post. Thread will quietly die now.

burned out=0 detail
shadows=much more detail than burned out parts

on digital, if you are shooting in RAW, you can recover more from the highlights. The phrase "expose to the right" is a reference to how your histogram should look
However, highlights are easily blown out (ie you cant get any information from them)

On film, it is easier to pull things from the shadows

Helpfull! +1

>>783185
EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	ACD Systems Digital Imaging
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2004:06:30 22:45:46
Image Width	377
Image Height	603

>>783194
this is why i love /p/

>>783194
Are you aiming that troll spray at yourself? You better be. What that guy said is correct (for the digital part at least).

>>783203
>what that guy said is correct
>except it's not correct

>>783207
You're either trolling or stupid and I can't tell which.
I'm terrible at explaining but there's really not much detail in shadows compared to highlights. Try bringing down non-blown highlights and compare it to bringing up shadows.
I always expose to the right - even when I want my image to be dark, in order to get more detail and avoid noise.

if in doubt, over expose a little bit, you'll get less noise turning exposures down than turning them up. However to fix this problem, duplicate a layer and set the new layer to Multiply. Repeat until it's in the desirable exposure. You may need to add layer masks to get things balanced out right. But that should do the trick.

>>783207
>except it's not correct
Looks correct to me. And "nuh uh" is not a sufficient argument to prove otherwise.