Re: contrast in p&s digital cameras vs film

On Oct 15, 3:33 pm, Don Stauffer in Minnesota <stauf...@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On Oct 14, 9:07 am, acl <achilleaslazari...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



On Oct 14, 9:05 am, "Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)"

<usern...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
H.S. wrote:
Hello,

I was wondering if anybody can comment on the quality of contrast in the
pictures taken with a point and shoot digital camera compared to the one
obtained on 35mm film.

I have seen pictures from Canon A520 and a few older models. I can
usually pick them out from the ones scanned from negatives quite easily.
The ones taken with digital cameras usually appear to have less contrast
and less amount of colors (less saturated colors?).

Anybody know of any recent digital cameras in which the colors are
better and we can have more contrast? I know this may appear to be a bit
vague, but related comments are welcome.

The main reason is that film has a toe in its characteristic
curve and digital cameras are linear.

Is that so? My reading of the Gurney-Mott business (a couple of years
ago and very superficial) led me to conclude that the formation of the
latent image on film is also a linear process (as long as you're not
in the region of low or high intensity reciprocity failure). The
characteristic curve comes when you develop it. So I don't see how
this is any different from digital capture, where the detection is
linear and you then apply a curve. I'm not an expert and just scanned
the paper quickly, so may have completely misunderstood it.

I'd say the difference the OP see is because of the processing, which
I think deserves a lot more attention than people seem to think. I
know this is also what you say below, but I think saying that one is
linear and the other isn't is not accurate (as it refers to different
stages of capture/development in each case). But maybe I am wrong.

They are also linear
at the low end after the "gamma" tone curve is applied.
Learn to use curves to add an s-curve response to give a
film-like response. You can boost contrast in camera, but
post processing gives more control over shadow and highlight detail.

Depends on the film. Some are quite linear, others are quite S-
curved. Look at the characteristic curves of various films.


I was talking about the latent image. See here:
... led me to conclude that the formation of the
latent image on film is also a linear process...

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: contrast in p&s digital cameras vs film
    ... The ones taken with digital cameras usually appear to have less contrast ... The main reason is that film has a toe in its characteristic ... curve and digital cameras are linear. ... characteristic curve comes when you develop it. ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
  • Re: contrast in p&s digital cameras vs film
    ... I was wondering if anybody can comment on the quality of contrast in the ... The ones taken with digital cameras usually appear to have less contrast ... curve and digital cameras are linear. ... characteristic curve comes when you develop it. ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
  • Re: contrast in p&s digital cameras vs film
    ... obtained on 35mm film. ... The ones taken with digital cameras usually appear to have less contrast ... curve and digital cameras are linear. ... characteristic curve comes when you develop it. ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
  • Re: contrast in p&s digital cameras vs film
    ... I was wondering if anybody can comment on the quality of contrast in the ... The ones taken with digital cameras usually appear to have less contrast ... curve and digital cameras are linear. ... characteristic curve comes when you develop it. ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
  • Re: contrast in p&s digital cameras vs film
    ... curve and digital cameras are linear. ... at the low end after the "gamma" tone curve is applied. ... think a relatively few P&S users do true post processing as you describe. ...
    (rec.photo.digital)