Hi, Bob. I didn't understand what you meant in your bracketing comment.
Please explain more.
Here's a nice overview of dynamic range with respect to both exposure
latitude and density. Not mentioned, however, is the fact that digital
sensors have a linear response to changing light intensity whereas film
has a non-linear response. The exposure latitude of modern digital
sensors is somewhere between slide and negative films.
<http://www.astropix.com/PFA/SAMPLE1/SAMPLE1.HTM>
Chuck Norcutt
Bob_Benson@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> As you all may remember, I'm comparing OM and E-3 photo's -- basically,
> I've taken several hundred where I took the same picture (equivalent
> lenses etc.) with an OM-4 and OM-2, and the E-3. My purpose is to
> better understand both, but also draw some conclusions. I haven't
> completed the comparisons (something about working to earn wherewithal for
> the E-3 and the film/processing), but I do have an opinion on this point
> in this thread.
>
> It's that digital behaves - in my opinion - much more like transparency
> film than print film. It's primarily an issue of dynamic range and
> (related) forgiveness of exposure. For example, I found much more
> difference in just the .3 stop bracketing in digital. Much more.
>
> Bob Benson
>
> PS: I'll have a fuller report soon.
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.4.7/1541 - Release Date: 7/8/2008 7:50
> PM
>
>
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|