Re: Return to film... True!


"Gordon Moat" <moat@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:43DAF47C.4010809@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
:
:
: random user 12987 wrote:
: > "Paul Furman" <paul-@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
: > news:aP6dnanRzu5Q0EfeRVn-sw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
: > : Matt Clara wrote:
: > :
: > : > "Paul Furman" <paul-@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
: > : > news:l5KdnWbqHO-x6ETeRVn-jA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
: > : >
: > : >>news-server.bigpond.net.au,
: > : >>only@xxxxxxxxx says...
: > : >>
: > : >>>>by a computer I can't program.
: > : >>
: > : >>We keep telling you to shoot RAW. But that's fine, MF film sounds
: > awesome,
: > : >>sounds like fun.
: > : >
: > : >
: > : > RAW is better than JPG, but a 6 MP file in any format won't enlarge
as
: > : > smoothly, with as much detail as decent 35mm film (Reala, Velvia,
Astia,
: > : > Portra). I suspect that's not true of the top of the line
Canon/Nikon,
: > but
: > : > I believe the jury still's out on the rest of the DSLR selection.
: > :
: > : I agree, film is great. It's just that he's complaining about having
no
: > : control over digital while shooting jpeg.
: > -------------------------------------------
: >
: >
: > That's wrong Paul. The "No Control" is as Gordon pointed out, something
that
: > takes place in the camera's computer and you simply can't control it. I
have
: > no real problem with digital images. I enlarge them and print them on
canvas
: > for a living. What I have a problem with is digital photography.
: >
:
:
: Bayer interpolation creates occasional (some would state rare) problems.
: Sure, not much control over that, even if you shoot RAW, but I don't
: think it is a huge issue. Sometimes this can happen in high frequency
: areas, liked patterned cloth of varying colour.
:
: There is a separate issue of noise showing in darker tones due to lack
: of photons. If you think of white as a full charge (lots of photons),
: then black is zero charge (no photons). Obviously I am extremely
: extremely extremely simplifying this, but I hope that gives you the
: correct idea that darker areas mean very few photons are captured. If
: you think of how Bayer interpolation works, you can see how noise has
: colour in dark areas of some images.
:
: The Canon 1Ds Mark II and Nikon D2X rarely have problems, but can be
: pushed to some realms that will show problems. Want an example: at an
: ASMP presentation we were shown a 15 second capture from a 1Ds Mark II,
: which had a good deal of noise (not terrible, but noticeable), then the
: same scene was shot at 13 seconds, and surprisingly had almost no noise.
: The lesson is there are times when problems will be noticeable.
:
: I should also point out that most digital medium format backs do
: slightly better than D-SLRs. Some of that is due to active cooling, and
: other times it is down to better processing and imaging chip
: performance. Of course, you pay lots for that.
:
: > Having seen so many digital pictures and only a remarkable few which are
: > dynamically equal to hand made film prints, I dusted off my Durst
Enlarger
: > and took the processor out of mothballs to do a few trials over
Christmas. I
: > can see now why so many people are fooled into believing digital is
somehow
: > "better" than film. Maybe this is why there are so few large processors
for
: > sale on the used market.
: >
:
:
: I disagree in the belief that images need lots of dynamic range to look
: good. High saturation and high contrast can often back for some very
: interesting images. Negative films are thought to have (in general) more
: dynamic range than transparency films, yet transparency films are the
: most used film types for professional film shooters . . . go figure.
:
: Ciao!
:
: Gordon Moat
: A G Studio
: <http://www.allgstudio.com>


Sadly Gordon I have a lot of examples of digital disasters where none should
exist. Canon's Sensors can produce some very strange behaviour which is
neither predictable nor repeatable but does result in faulty images. I also
have some examples of D2X (before it was stolen) demonstrating it also can
behave badly under some circumstances.

The most frequent event that comes to mind is the ability of a Canon 10D,
and 20D sensor to 'ghost' part of an image in an otherwise correctly exposed
area. I first noticed this with someone else's 10D image of a Motorcycle.
Part of the image had a double outline but this was not the part which was
moving. Both were in clear focus.

Some time after, I repeated it with a picture of Pelicans flying in
formation. A ghosted eye on one of the bird's heads when all else (including
it's nostrils) was in clear focus. I didn't notice this until I interpolated
the image into a poster but on careful examination of the original file, it
was a part of the image. I shot several frames of them as they closed on me
but only one had that problem.

Another event, this time in low light, produced the same ghosting of only
part of an otherwise static area. I shot 10 more identical frames and could
not repeat the problem. No one I've shown the images to can explain the
phenomena.

You probably don't have much of a issue with dynamic range in a city known
for it's haze and covering of smog ...but when the sun is at it's worst in
Queensland Australia, Digital cameras cannot cope with the contrast range of
outdoor shots. Using a flash to try and expand that range is only a partial
solution. No other option exists except to not take the picture - try
telling a bride you didn't take her pictures because your camera couldn't
record enough detail.

At the point where a digital camera stops recording highlight detail (starts
to blow the highlights out of existence) a negative can still contain a stop
or two of realizable detail as can the deep shadows of a negative. Dynamic
range is most definitely an issue when you have no options NOT to take the
picture and the groom is wearing black next to the bride in white. Which
would you sacrifice Gordon? Shadow or highlight?


.

Relevant Pages

  • Heavily degraded video restoration
    ... I have a series of images taken from a video which has been ... Now i am digitally restoring these films after the telecine ... previous or next frame to compensate for the color. ... improvement in my output.However my knowledge of statistics ...
    (comp.soft-sys.matlab)
  • Re: Indecent pics of children and possession
    ... It was thus involved in large scale child abuse. ... loadsamoney by setting up a website to sell images of his abuses. ... done the same thing with its child stars in a way that is arguably far ... Various countries produce professional films that feature naked ...
    (uk.legal)
  • Re: Slide copiers
    ... digitise 100 slides for ten quid! ... images you can play about with enhancement of the images. ... Maximum of 5 films per CD on retrospective CD burns. ... and I'm not certain about the universe. ...
    (uk.rec.waterways)
  • Re: d2x vs. f6 with velvia: anybodys got a link?
    ... > you could reach about the same resolution. ... various test resolutions of their films. ... > i love projecting my images then with no doubt i'd say that slides are ... If you take photos mostly hand held, ...
    (rec.photo.equipment.35mm)
  • Re: Californication: breaks new child pornography rules?
    ... Lone male with the images downloaded from the internet = Sick Pedo ... But then the new Bill specifically exempts films that have been given ... while the Child Porn laws make no distinction for ... films given a BBFC certificate. ...
    (uk.legal)
Loading