Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > Newbie Help

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 11, 2005, 10:41 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
terry@softreq.com's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,539
Default

I would agree with Eric, in technical terms, of film versus digital.

However, I'm saying the process has improved considerably so that a person of any means can have quite a bit of control over their process, and do so cheaply.

Eric is correct that digital couldn't compare to probably the best 35mm films taken well and processed well, and medium format going beyond that.

However, we are still in early days of digital.

It took 80 years for film to be where it is now. Digital has really only been around seriously for 20 years or less, depending on how you want to measure it.

In 20 or 30 years time, we could have technology that surpasses even medium format.

And who know how we'll be viewing those pictures? Perhaps we'll have viewers so large and detailed that we'll be able to walk up to wall sized projections of our photos, with amazing detail even at one square inch.

I sometimes project my photos using a DLP projector against a high quality screen. It's quite amazing. 2000:1 contrast ratio, 100 inch diagonal image. My photos look mind blowing!

But maybe not as good as my father's slides projected with his old carousel projector.

-- Terry


terry@softreq.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2005, 6:18 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

Terry, I completely agree.

I was absolutely not trying to say that digital will never be better. I expect it to within a few generations of sensors (except for dynamic range. That is an area that they are just not trying to solve... Maybe they could out-do it, who knows? But they aren't trying.)

I've used projectors that cost in the $10,000+ range. 3,000 lumins. Things made to project for 30,000 people events. And a really good slide projector (I'm talking top-of-the-line) is better in some ways. The detail in a perfectly focused slide and projector is better in all cases that I've seen. But digital projectors are getting better.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2005, 6:46 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
techgeek419's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 404
Default

some great info here.

Curious, what is meant by "dynamic range"?

Many of the shots I was referring to which looked good on film were"Landscape" style shots. They includedsunsets, city scenes,and bridge photos. There was alot of detail in them and the white balance was excellent.

techgeek419 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 13, 2005, 6:36 AM   #14
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

techgeek419 wrote:
Quote:
Curious, what is meant by "dynamic range"?
Dynamic range is the range between the darkness and the brightness that a medium can capture: For example slides has a 5-6 stops range, compare to negative which can range anywhere from 6 to 9 f-stops

This has always been the archille's heel of digital cameras, and has been problematics for folks shooting weddings (especially outdoor) because the groom can be wearing all blacks and the brides all white in full sun - you'll either loses the highlights or the shadows :evil:


Quote:
There was alot of detail in them and the white balance was excellent
... This is not to be confused with film latitude where it is related. With digital one has to be spot-on with the exposure or the highlight will be clipped (or bury in the noise shadow) - This is why so many folks are having problem with their 'digital' flash pictures now: It's not that the camera/flash has changed, in fact the flash/metering systems have become better, ETTL-II etc..., just that unlike film which can tolerate a 3-4 stops error you're seeing all the wash out more easily! :-) :lol: :G



[email protected] wrote:
Quote:
I sometimes project my photos using a DLP projector against a high quality screen. It's quite amazing. 2000:1 contrast ratio, 100 inch diagonal image. My photos look mind blowing!

But maybe not as good as my father's slides projected with his old carousel projector.
You got it (see below)!!!
http://www.christiedigital.com/produ...ifications.asp
http://www.barco.com/digitalcinema/e...ctoverview.asp
--> How many pixels projected over how many ft diagonal again? :idea:
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 13, 2005, 11:42 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
bernabeu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 990
Default

hasselblad - 22 meg



case closed
bernabeu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 14, 2005, 12:55 AM   #16
Member
 
gordy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 44
Default

I think it would take @30mp to equal good 35mm film
gordy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 14, 2005, 9:53 AM   #17
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

bernabeu wrote:
Quote:
hasselblad - 22 meg

case closed
Actually it's not closed: 22Mpixels on a 50mmx38.8mm is less resolution than a 5D @ 12.8Mpixels on a 36mmx24mm frame (~11340 vs ~14815 pixels/mmxmm)

BTW that's old new - this device is higher: http://wwwde.kodak.com/global/en/dig...AF-39000.jhtml

NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 14, 2005, 10:09 AM   #18
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

NHL wrote:
Quote:
bernabeu wrote:
Quote:
hasselblad - 22 meg

case closed
Actually it's not closed: 22Mpixels on a 50mmx38mm is less resolution than a 5D @ 12.8Mpixels on a 36mmx24mm frame (~11579 vs ~14815 pixels/mmxmm)

The 5D is also just a little cheaper by about $15000 or so:G
rjseeney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 14, 2005, 10:24 AM   #19
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

rjseeney wrote:
Quote:
The 5D is also just a little cheaper by about $15000 or so:G
Who know history may repeat itself...
-> why not use two CMOS/CCD sensors: :lol: :-) :G
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/R3K/R3KA.HTM

BTW thoses interchangeable Vectis lenses for APS cameras are what we call 'digital' lens today! :idea:

NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 14, 2005, 12:26 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
bobbyz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,423
Default

I love landscapes from LF but show my some action shots from that thing.
bobbyz is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:02 PM.