August 29, 2014, 04:33:56 AM

Author Topic: Better dynamic range than my 5DIII  (Read 6592 times)

dtaylor

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 564
    • View Profile
Re: Better dynamic range than my 5DIII
« Reply #15 on: October 07, 2012, 02:25:58 AM »
I'm not convinced that this is greater DR then a 5D3 could handle. It also lacks sharpness, contrast, and does show grain (noise).

Digital DR is better than is commonly assumed. E6 slide films ranged from 6-8 usable stops. C14 print films generally fell into the 10-14 stop range. B&W film had a wide variance depending on emulsion, developer, and development technique: 8-18 stops. Very few people actually pick their film, developer, and technique to get a really wide range out of B&W. And most B&W emulsions will have similar or less DR than a modern DSLR given standard development.

DSLRs are now in the 11-15 stop range when shooting RAW. Perhaps more importantly, there is unparalleled control over the color, contrast, and tonality of the final image, separate from the DR. With film if you wanted a wide DR you had to accept the other characteristics of the film. (Not completely true with film scanners since they open the image to digital processing.)

As to why you expose for highlights or shadows...

* An emulsion layer is a thin but three dimensional space of silver halide crystals of varying size, shape, orientation, and therefore sensitivity. As light strikes the emulsion the most sensitive crystals are altered first. A single crystal will either develop or not, there are no shades of gray at that level. As light continues to fall on the film, some of it strikes crystals which have already changed, adding to the time it takes to alter the least sensitive crystals. Film's sensitivity drops as it is exposed to light. In long exposures we easily observe this and call it reciprocity failure, but it's at play even in the shortest exposures. This is why film has more highlight than shadow range, and a softer roll off at the highlight end.

* Slide film is processed to provide a reversed image. In theory this should give the same DR but with more shadow range. In practice slide films always had less DR because they were engineered to have more contrast and saturation so they looked good when projected.

* Digital sensors build a charge as light strikes the sensor, and there's a hard limit on that charge. When they hit that wall there's no roll off, the photosite simply clips. They have more shadow range than film because they simply have less noise for a given sensitivity, so the soft roll off...and the room for error...occurs on the shadow side.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Better dynamic range than my 5DIII
« Reply #15 on: October 07, 2012, 02:25:58 AM »

symmar22

  • Guest
Re: Better dynamic range than my 5DIII
« Reply #16 on: October 07, 2012, 05:59:04 AM »
Nice picture, taken very likely with a very large format view camera. Excellent DR could be due to masking work in the lab (likely a contact print). This looks like to be some early 20th century polar expedition of some sort, so making such a picture in these times was some kind of adventure on it's own, considering the equipment used (wood camera and tripod, brass lens and a suitcase of chassis). Resolution and grain are not perfect, but we are here talking about likely 100 years old equipment, nevertheless a great picture, considering the tech available then. IMHO comparison with a 5D3 is like comparing a Ford model T with an Audi A6 (sorry, cars are not my favourite matter).

However, this is to remind us that film still has something to say, especially with large formats. I still use my Linhof Technika 2000 for landscape and architecture as a hobby, and the pleasure I get from it is way beyond the one I ever had from digital work. Once you get good results, the reward is just immense....

Ryan_W

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 69
    • View Profile
Re: Better dynamic range than my 5DIII
« Reply #17 on: October 07, 2012, 03:31:50 PM »
Obviously this is a camera that had at least 19 cross-type AF points. There's just no other explanation for it.

Patrick

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 45
    • View Profile
    • Patrick's Fotos
Re: Better dynamic range than my 5DIII
« Reply #18 on: October 07, 2012, 04:36:58 PM »
This is "Grotto in an iceberg", photographed during the British Antarctic Expedition of 1911-1913, 5 Jan 1911 by Herbert Ponting. It is in the collection of the National Library of New Zealand. it's a silver gelatin print, reference number: PA1-f-067-12-04.
Please give the photographer his due credit even if the image is released under the creative commons licence!


vlad

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 45
    • View Profile
Re: Better dynamic range than my 5DIII
« Reply #19 on: October 26, 2012, 03:27:55 PM »
This is "Grotto in an iceberg", photographed during the British Antarctic Expedition of 1911-1913, 5 Jan 1911 by Herbert Ponting. It is in the collection of the National Library of New Zealand. it's a silver gelatin print, reference number: PA1-f-067-12-04.
Please give the photographer his due credit even if the image is released under the creative commons licence!

There is a description and a link to more details in the original post.  I think the photo is fantastic, and I certainly want to credit its creator.

Definitely an interesting discussion.  I think it serves to deflate some of the hubris and tech insanity going around today.  Technology keeps advancing, but great images aren't all about latest and greatest tech.

RLPhoto

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3358
  • Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
    • View Profile
    • My Portfolio
Re: Better dynamic range than my 5DIII
« Reply #20 on: October 26, 2012, 03:38:50 PM »
Its not the camera but the Fleshy, breathing Device behind it is what counts.

dr croubie

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1398
  • Too many photos, too little time.
    • View Profile
Re: Better dynamic range than my 5DIII
« Reply #21 on: October 26, 2012, 06:16:33 PM »
Its not the camera but the Fleshy, breathing Device behind it is what counts.

CameraSatan standing over your shoulder?
Too much gear, too little space.
Gear Photos

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Better dynamic range than my 5DIII
« Reply #21 on: October 26, 2012, 06:16:33 PM »

RLPhoto

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3358
  • Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
    • View Profile
    • My Portfolio
Re: Better dynamic range than my 5DIII
« Reply #22 on: October 26, 2012, 06:31:11 PM »
Its not the camera but the Fleshy, breathing Device behind it is what counts.

CameraSatan standing over your shoulder?

Do you mean Nikon? ;D

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Better dynamic range than my 5DIII
« Reply #22 on: October 26, 2012, 06:31:11 PM »