- This topic is empty.
Staff Only
-
The image of the day it was called. A masterpiece in design and composition. I thought it was alright.
Taken with a Mamiya C330 on Ilford Delta 400 Pro kindly donated by NFL. Processed in some stuff that the Fizz found lying around and shaken vigorously by Alessia (the film in the tank, not the Fizz) and the abuse again kindly donated by all three.
Alan.
Nice conversion…
Is this HDR?
I wonder how many megapixels that is…Looks great, you’re being very modest-
However, once you get something like that,
you can’t deny that you’re hooked-Another one, reel him in…
Very nice composition, simple and straightforward, yet a lot of interesting stuff to look at.
and you souped it yourself, cool.
Worth all the abuse.Martin
jb7 wrote:
Is this HDR?
I wonder how many megapixels that is…I don’t think you can call B&W film HDR by any stretch of the imagination. To my recollection, B&W film gives you a dynamic range of about 7 stops. Where’s multiple raw digital exposures can give you up to 20 stops of dynamic range.
Here’s a good link to read: http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/film.vs.digital.summary1.html
Thanks folks. It’s fun, I admit even though the postie let me down today on film and camera :-(
JB – it might be worth your while reading up on this stuff. It might come in useful…even I knew it wasn’t HDR.
Alan
davekeogh wrote:
I don’t think you can call B&W film HDR by any stretch of the imagination. To my recollection, B&W film gives you a dynamic range of about 7 stops. Where’s multiple raw digital exposures can give you up to 20 stops of dynamic range.
Here’s a good link to read: http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/film.vs.digital.summary1.html
Really?
I must have a read of that sometime…
Perhaps you might want to have a look at this one,
current on the LFPF-http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=55797
Of course, multiple exposures are not required, and there’s not much fun in that, I suppose…
I suppose we’re both right, and both wrong. It is possible to extract up to 20 stops of tonal range from a black and white print, But to achieve this, one would have to do something similar to raw processing for a single image HDR from a digital camera. Although there may be 20 stops of range available, the visible range printed from a negative may be alot lower. To increase the range visible, you’d need to do something similar to what Charles Wyckoff did for the atomic bombs tests, multiple prints need to be combined in order to present the full range in one single photograph.
From looking at the shadows, and range in the image I believe that this image is not HDR. Someone correct me if I am wrong, because I’m certainly not infallible!
Lovely image there Alan.
Did you handhold or use a tripod?
Say hello to ‘Mami’ for me, I miss her :cry: .
It was handheld George…nice, well kept piece of kit…if not a little difficult to compose with the flipped image. It’s in a good home now!
And no Dave – it isn’t a digital HDR image – a scan from a negative. No trickery here…as if I would. ;-)
Alan.
davekeogh wrote:
I don’t think you can call B&W film HDR by any stretch of the imagination. To my recollection, B&W film gives you a dynamic range of about 7 stops.
You appear to be a bit mixed up here-
HDR, to me, is a technique for exceeding the subject brightness range (SBR) that your sensor is capable of capturing,
from the deepest blacks, to the blown out whites.
There would appear to be no upper limit for the range captured, in stops, at least judging by some of the examples I’ve seen-
imposing a limit of 20 stops might seem comparatively restrained, sometimes-B&W film, as you might see from the discussion I linked to, is capable of representing a SBR way beyond 7 stops-
I think you might have got that mixed up with a digital camera sensor, perhaps-
for which the term HDR was invented- I think-
Some colour negative film is capable of recording around 11 stops SBR,
transparency film much less, 4-7 stops- depending on the film.It is possible to extract up to 20 stops of tonal range from a black and white print, But to achieve this, one would have to do something similar to raw processing for a single image HDR from a digital camera. Although there may be 20 stops of range available, the visible range printed from a negative may be alot lower. To increase the range visible, you’d need to do something similar to what Charles Wyckoff did for the atomic bombs tests, multiple prints need to be combined in order to present the full range in one single photograph.
It is possible to extract up to 20 stops of tonal range from a black and white print
I don’t understand this, the tonal range of a BW print is more or less fixed-
and it’s more like 6-7 stops- under ideal lighting-
you can measure it with a spot meter.If you mean a negative, no, wrong again, you process the negative in normal chemistry.
The information is on the negative, and can be interpreted using hybrid techniques-
film capture/digital output-But to achieve this, one would have to do something similar to raw processing for a single image HDR from a digital camera.
Is this HDR, or Tone Mapping?
HDR, to me, is the technique that uses multiple exposures to extend the SBR beyond that which can be captured by a sensor in a single exposure.
Tone Mapping might be closer to what you mean-multiple prints need to be combined in order to present the full range in one single photograph
I don’t understand this at all…
Again, there seems to be some mix up here, unless you mean negatives?
If you do, then no, wrong, one negative is all you need-
though I could be mistaken in my attempt at interpreting what you’re trying to say-I don’t know much about HDR, I’ll admit-
If I am wrong about any of this,
I’d welcome the correction-btw, my first comments in this thread were not meant to be taken seriously.
If only I could learn to keep my mouth shut.btw, my first comments in this thread were not meant to be taken seriously.
If only I could learn to keep my mouth shut.€2.99 refund for me, so!
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
