Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,729   Posts: 1,515,251   Online: 784
      
Page 4 of 30 FirstFirst 1234567891014 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 297
  1. #31
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    I'm not talking about shooting negatives, making inter-negs, inter-pos, DI, final prints, etc. I get all that and the reasons used.

    I'm specifically challenging neg->neg somehow offering more fidelity than pos->pos, completely outside the scope of cinematography or movie making.
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  2. #32
    AgX
    AgX is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,219
    Even outside the cinematographic field a neg-pos workflow (at least two materials involved) gains more freedom and thus quality.

  3. #33
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    I'm not talking about freedom to muck around. I'm specifically targeting the comment that neg to neg is somehow higher fidelity than pos to pos.
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  4. #34
    AgX
    AgX is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,219
    Fidelity starts from what you get. Current colour reversal materials are not good at it. Even basically such materials are are not good at it.

  5. #35
    MDR
    MDR is offline
    MDR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Austria
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,039
    I'd say you get more latitude and dynamic range with neg film so neg to neg should be better. Positive films usually have more inherent contrast than negative films meaning they retain less image information that can be reproduced and you already loose a lot of information at the copy/printing stage. Neg low contrast to ultra low contrast Neg (print) pos higher contrast to slightly higher contrast (loss of information).

  6. #36
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    Yes but pos pos materials take contrast into consideration. They aren't exposure from camera films.
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  7. #37
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    6,888
    Images
    222
    I would argue that everything in the movie world is scanned now anyways and scanning a transparency editing the content and then producing transparencies for projection causes less issue in quality than 3 copies on film, but I could be wrong about the scanning bit.

    I assumed the reason they use the low contrast negs had more to do with the digital editing process and technicolor's handling profile and how they prefer to begin with muted colors and low contrast and add that stuff later on.


    ~Stone | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  8. #38
    Steve Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ryde, Isle of Wight
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    8,525
    Images
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by MattKing View Post
    1) movies are edited before they are distributed
    Are they edited as a negative?


    Steve.

  9. #39
    MDR
    MDR is offline
    MDR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Austria
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,039
    No as prints or more likely scans (fully digital) Btw. editing does not equal cutting. The negatives/prints are cut by a negative cutter.

  10. #40
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,008
    Images
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by clayne View Post
    I'm not talking about freedom to muck around. I'm specifically targeting the comment that neg to neg is somehow higher fidelity than pos to pos.
    Among many other things, I rely on the many posts on this subject that PE has made - he has on multiple occasions stated that the limitations of the physics and chemical components themselves mean that a negative + negative copying process is inherently capable of higher quality.
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

Page 4 of 30 FirstFirst 1234567891014 ... LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin