They far exceed 9 stops.
Originally Posted by 2F/2F
My 30D is capable of 10 stops.
Newer digital SLRs are of much more, the highest is the old Fuji S3/S5 Pro at 14 stops, followed by the D3x closely, then followed by the D3/D700, 5DII and the rest closely behind that, followed by the medium format backs.
I just developed an expired roll of some german film I got for 50c a roll at the second hand shop, 200 ISO, exposed from 100 ISO to 3200 ISO, all those shots came out looking decent so far inspect the negative.
But I use my own custom process which incorporates a first developer for flexibility.
First develop -> Fix -> Bleach -> Re-expose to light -> Colour Developer -> Bleach -> Fix, etc with wash in between.
Keep in mind that analog films gain dynamic range by compressing the density range in the toe and shoulder, while digital stores electrons in 'buckets' (pixels) and is essentially linear in response. The linear portion of the D-log(E) curve is usually less than the 7-9 stop full range. In digital recording the larger the buckets, the greater the dynamic range because more electrons can be stored, but at cost of correspondingly larger pixels. Our favorite analog materials are indeed impressive in their ability to record wide luminosity range. In the end however, the dynamic range that can be printed to paper and viewed is usually quite a lot less than what is recorded. At the printing stage the digital record compares with analog after one applies curves correction to render the image to a non-linear response--a result that we get automatically when we use analog materials.
By denying the facts, any paradox can be sustained--Galileo
I 100% disagree with the large photosite = more dynamic range, the opposite has been shown to be true, with progression of tech, hence D3x being the #1 sensor in dynamic range (except for the S3 and S5 - but thats similar to some films with different pixel/grain sizes mixed together), a fair bit about the D3 and D700.
You should be able to insert a analogue compressor/limiter before the ADC in a digital camera to compress the shoulder in a similar manner and gain a bit in the highlights, the photosites do not reach saturation by the time highlights blow out in the analogue converted digital image, this should be shown by the S3/S5, which adds 2 stops to the range when the smaller photosites (1/4 the area of the larger ones, and thus receive 1/4 the photons, but per mm^2 squared, receives the same), though this isnt really a digital discussion forum.
I think it is important to note here that a linear comparison is misleading.
Originally Posted by mts
Even though it is true that the paper can't represent the same f-stop range that film can, all the detail captured in a C-41 negative, maybe even all 25 stops, are selectively printable within the paper's range.
I would almost bet this is why Ansel used the word "zones" instead of "stops" to describe his system for exposure and printing. 11 zones in the scene are caught in 11 zones on the film and printed in 11 zones on paper regardless of how many f-stops are involved.
Conversely, any media that we might use in a camera that can't catch the entire range that C-41 can, has absolutely no hope of printing that "lost" detail.
This is where C-41's latitude shines. If I goof up (or I use a Holga) and miss the "correct/perfect exposure" by one stop or even three, it's no biggie; I just adjust for that when I enlarge it.
If I miss by three stops with any other media I have lost a much more significant chunk of the detail I was after.
Last edited by markbarendt; 12-05-2009 at 09:52 AM. Click to view previous post history.
Reason: Oopsed before I was ready
Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO
"We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin
Well, firstoff a digital "curve" is a V Log E curve and when plotted looks just like a D Log E curve with a toe and shoulder. The Dmax is the brightnss capability expressed in voltage of the system you are using and is divided into the number of pixels that can represent a dmax vs dmin.
In film, due to technical reasons, reversal films are rather much limited to a dmax of 3.0 or thereabouts, but negative films as noted earlier can go on up to 4.0 or higher. When making a print on paper, the Dmax is limited to about 2.0 but if you print on a print film the Dmax is 4.0 or higher just like the negative. So, a print on film Neg-Neg is the best representation of the entire tone scale of the original negative. No other system can match this, but no print films are available for common use except for Eastman Color Print film which is not matched to any consumer negative film.
In any event, all of the above is true for color and B&W films.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Pretty intuitive of you. The word "Zone" refers only to the exposure scale i.e., the "Zones of the exposure scale". The scale itself representing levels of exposure starting initially with the original meter reading then progressing downward to -5 then upward to +5. The choice for Roman numerals came about to ensure no confusion between the zones of the exposure scale and the numerical luminance value readings associated with meters-------so when the needle lands on 5, there is no absolute relation between the numerical number 5 and the exposure Zone V. Making it easy to see that a luminance value of 5 can be "placed" on, say, zone III of the exposure scale, so that development will produce a negative density value of III (fixing that density on the negative) and printing can yield a print value III (but the final print value is not necessarily fixed, it can be subject to your manipulations). In this way, all other luminances in the scene will fall on the exposure scale relative to the placement of the initial reading.
Originally Posted by markbarendt
The highest DR figure I have seen in independent testing of the Fuji is just over 12 stops with raw tweaking. I haven't used it, myself, though I have used just about every Canon made since the original 1D. The best of them get about a stop from the Fuji with raw tweaking. Not one of them has anywhere near the usable DR of color negative film, or even b/w negative film. This is a discussion for another forum, but 14 stops of usable dynamic range from the Fuji is just not the case...and it is sad that we think of that as a lot of DR, after all these years of digital being shoved down consumers' throats as superior in every way. Getting 14 stops compressed into a print is really a fairly simple and easy affair with b/w printing or C-41 printing...with the caveat being that you have to know what the hell you are doing a lot more than you do with digital. You need to understand chemistry, printing, etc., and you can't blow through 50 images like nothing...but the technical superiority in this area still belongs to film.
Last edited by 2F/2F; 12-05-2009 at 07:31 PM. Click to view previous post history.
"Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."
- Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)
That's incorrect - you cannot change the dynamic range of an image with "raw tweaking" it is fixed, and the information is either there or isn't - though you may clip some during raw conversion if youre not careful.
Look at the low ISO results in DR on dxomark.com
Please keep the digital comments in the HybridPhoto sister site.
Originally Posted by Athiril
Moderators please move the digital comments to HybridPhoto so that this thread does not get closed.
Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!
Nothing beats a great piece of glass!
I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.
I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid. I love hybrid.