[Tig] Is there anybody out there

[pictureelements]

Deanan <delusion at delusion.com> wrote:

Both. Absolutely more dynamic range and enough sampling resolution to
carry as much of the tone transitions through as possible. Having only four
or 6 stops with lots of tone is great but lose the ability to do any 
remapping
in post and your trade off both shadow detail and highlight 
response/transitions.
Although, you can make the same argument for shooting neg vs. reversal.

#1 If we shoot a white peace of paper against a black background. with 8 stops difference,any" Bayer-format-sensors" or "Foveon-sensors" will not hold detail in both extreme. 5 is about the limit!  If the highlights really are all blown out and you
 you can't light the entire scene to match the dynamic range, you'll have to sacrifice shadows or  highlights. (I've learn that from my favorites DPs :)
 

That really depends on how you do your tone mapping from the HDR to
a viewing space. You can get as contrasty as you like. It's not much different
than compressing your wide dynamic range negative into a lower dynamic range
print stock.

#2  Yes with double exposure and HDR we can get a great deal of data in either end of the tone scale .But I would not imply that rendering and encoding for a target of let say 2D is "colorimetric-correct" without much noise created by that extra contrast/sharpness.


We tolerate alot of noise in film because it's very nice noise (depending
on the stock, some stocks have ugly grain). The main difference between
digital and film is that digital tends to have noise mostly in the 
shadows (if
properly exposed) but not elsewhere. Film on the other hand has grain
everywhere. A nice side effect of grain everywhere is an increase in
perceived sharpness without actually being sharper (nice for skin tone
because it hides wrinkles and pores).

#3 I like the way you blur the line between noise and grain. Can you tell me why there is not difference.

The extra stops in the highlights are great for making the specular
transitions look nicer (and why digital cameras with not much
latitude have really harsh specular response). At the same time,
more latitude means that you can go into shadows alot more
and still be above the noise floor. Of course, the more you
push the rating on a digital camera, the more you start to bring
out the noise tends to more funky than pushing film.

#4 I agree that there is no such Digital camera that's probably one of the reason why ILM developed HDR.


With Bayer format sensors, it's the inherent color balance of the
sensor's filters that cause the color channels to go out at different rates.
If you sensor is daylight balanced, then your red will by much more 
sensitive
than the blue and will reach saturation much faster than the blue if you're
shooting a daylight balanced scene. Film has the same issues but they're
less apparent because they're compensated for by the shoulder and the
print. A digital camera with a good shoulder and more latitude will get
you more balanced highlights but instead of balancing the highlights
via the print, you have to do it by processing the image.

 #4 I think it's hard not to clip those strong color dominant for those Digital sensors and If we  look at  the highlights of a plant in bright day light for example, they are yellow and green, even a white peace of paper is color cast. There is no true white there is no black, mostly Grey shade. Those digital sensors will overload in extreme Dynamic range. Film doesn't  and show better contrast/sharpness/color-accuracy. 
Have you play with Professional Kodak/Fuji film lately? Just Beautiful!
http://www.bobinevideo.com/ Jais

 		
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs.Try it free.