Seems to me that there are *two* factors at work here, not mutually
exclusive. The Dmax wouldn't explain why dust effects are amplified--and
they seem to be, by empirical observation of several members. Nor would the
dynamic range explain why light appears to be magnified in contrast to dark
areas (although that's also a function of the human eye, and not easily
I might very well be missing something, here, but I'm trying not to. In the
experiments I did with pin-pricked leader, *all* of the effects noted in
this and other threads were evidenced. Not, unfortunately, in any pattern
that could be pointed to and said of, "AhHa!." So the Jury's still out on
this one, too, IMHO. :-)
> > Plus the fact that this sucker
> > amplifies
> > light. I'm sure you're aware of that.
>I think this is his misunderstanding of dynamic range, and is not an
>accurate statement. There is no amplification, it is just that the sensor
>has a wider dynamic range than typical film does.
>Just like a scanner that has a higher dynamic range (what the scanner
>manufacturers typically call DMax, which isn't really right...but if it is
>zero referenced, ie, DMin is 0, than it is the same) gets more detail out
>the darker areas of film, so will a digital cameras sensor.
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com