But that's not the same as dynamic range. I assume you're talking about
negative film which should handle overexposure fairly well. But what
happened to your shadow areas with the overexposure? If all was
hunky-dory with a two stop overexposure why doesn't the manufacturer
rate the film at two stops over. Once again, what do the film
manufacturers state their dynamic range to be?
Chuck Norcutt
On 5/1/2012 10:03 PM, C.H.Ling wrote:
> Don't know about the film data but I have overexposed some Fuji 100/200 to
> two stops or more and the color is still great, you can never get the same
> with digital.
>
> C.H.Ling
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Chuck Norcutt"<chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
>> You are quoting DR numbers for film higher than anything I have ever
>> seen. What I'm interested in is not the AG dynamic range but what Kodak
>> or Fuji says about their films.
>>
>> Numbers I'm familiar with are more like 5-6 stops for slide film and
>> 9-11 stops for negatives. Do you have some non-AG numbers to dispute
>> that?
>>
>> Chuck Norcutt
>>
>>
>> On 5/1/2012 6:39 PM, Ken Norton wrote:
>>>> OK, I'll buy it if you give me the actual dynamic range numbers.
>>>
>>> Without jumping to heroics, I was getting 12-14 stops of DR and the
>>> highlights and shadows didn't go wonky. With heroics (adjusting the
>>> scanner's exposure times" I'm seeing another two stops lurking in
>>> there, but depending on the picture, this may or may not be overly
>>> usable.
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|