Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

   


   


   















      :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[filmscanners] RE: Density vs Dynamic range



Hi Todd,

> >>> but the
> >>> slide film in fact has less dynamic range than negative film,
> though slide
> >>> film does have a higher density range.
>
> >> So please
> >> explain what you base your assertion on.
>
> > Actually, it's not my assertion, but something that has always
> just been a
> > given amongst professionals I have spoken with about this, and what I've
> > read.
>
> I would presume that what is said is that "neg film can HOLD a greater
> dynamic range than slide film". In this case dynamic range is a misnomer -
> what is meant is it can hold a greater luminosity range, as the
> visual world
> is made up of reflected/transmitted light, not density.

It holds a greater SCENE "density range"...obviously, the representation of
the scene "density" is placed into the density range of the film.  Calling
it luminosity is fine, but density is also reflected as well as transmitted.

> So, there must be a point at which either film may of itself HAVE
> (not hold)
> a higher dynamic range, and the parameters of that would include
> the scene's
> luminosity range, exposure, development, etc. IOW, how the scene
> is tailored
> to fit within the density range of the film.

I agree that the dynamic range you get from film critically depends a LOT on
exposure and development.

Regards,

Austin

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body



 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.