Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/08/08

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Vs: [Leica] Performers and flare
From: "Raimo Korhonen" <raimo.korhonen@pp2.inet.fi>
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 22:31:09 +0200

Can´t you read? I do not think that even Erwin means that flare (or veiling glare) does not diminish contrast - because that´s what it does. Muddy - yes, that´s what a low contrast image looks like. Ant low contrast means that the contrast range between shadows and highlights decreases - or vice versa if you like.
Do you wish to put Ansel Adams in the closet, too, with Bruce Davidson and Ed Meyers. Nonsense, you say? Weird? Maybe but it is a simple optical fact. Many times those who do not really know speak the loudest.
All the best!
Raimo
photos at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen

- -----Alkuperäinen viesti-----
Lähettäjä: ralph fuerbringer <rof@mac.com>
Vastaanottaja: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Päivä: 08. elokuuta 2000 19:16
Aihe: Re: [Leica] Performers and flare


>ed meyers goes into the closet! he started automatic flarefill nonsense
>with uncoated lenses,slow film, outside in the hot sun w/bruce davidson. now
>he's passing himself off as a low-lite fast-film photographer using inside
>flare for fill. in support of his weird theories he uses quotes from
> Erwin Puts (below) to confirm a flare prone lens just makes dark areas
>muddy. could anyone but an editor so succinctly disprove his own case?  he
>called me weird. i can't decide what to call him now. I like inside-outside
>ed, but muddy meyers sounds so good.then there's always editor. ralph
>
>
>> From: Edward Meyers <aghalide@panix.com>
>> Reply-To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>> Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 09:19:09 -0400 (EDT)
>> To: L U G <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
>> Subject: Re: [Leica] Performers and flare
>> 
>> If only low-light photographers could use a 100 ISO speed film
>> and make meaningful images with slow speeds and a tripod...
>> It is not the case, however. So we do what we can with high-speed
>> films. Filling in deep shadows in high-contrast low-light
>> situations, without a flash (hopefully), if helped by flare,
>> then the photograph might look better. If only this were a
>> perfect world... Ed
>> 
>> On Tue, 8 Aug 2000, Erwin Puts wrote:
>> 
>>> It was noted: "Once you get past Erwin's bench tests, is there really a
>>> "bad" version of
>>> the Summicron 35?...I've owned various versions over the years - I assume,
>>> as I've purchased them all used at widely different period of my life - and
>>> they've all be terrific performers."
>>> 
>>> If this really is what the poster assumes, I can only add: if your
>>> definition of "terrific performers" is modest enough, he is absolutely
>>> right. Most Leica photographers I know however see very discernable
>>> differences. The performance you can extract from a lens is tightly coupled
>>> to technical expertise and the level of your demands and your type of
>>> picture taking. Without this background info any statement about good
>>> performance is void.
>>> The flare issue. Flare is defined as unwanted stray light, that will be
>>> uniformly distributed over the whole image area. If we have a scene from
>>> black to white, we will have a range of figures that indicate relative
>>> contrast, we have a rnage of 100 to 0.25 lux, indicating light and dark
>>> areas, which is a contrast of 400:1. Add a uniform flare level of 0.25 lux
>>> and we now have 100.25 and 0.5, giving a contrast of 200:1. The effect on
>>> the dark areas is big and on the lighter areas to be neglected. This example
>>> shows two things: flare does simply give greater negative density in the
>>> thin parts of the negative (the black areas), and will give a dark grey
>>> instead of a black, suggesting detail, which is not there.
>>> The old story that you can use a low contrast and/or flare prone lens to
>>> compensate for high contrast in the scene is not correct. The highlights are
>>> not affected and the dark areas just become muddy.
>>> The best proposal: buy a high contrast lens, use a 100ISO BW film that gives
>>> good toe density and expose and develop to get the maximum contrast your
>>> print paper can handle.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Erwin
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>

Replies: Reply from Guy Bennett <guy.bennett@wanadoo.fr> (RE: [Leica] Performers and flare - DR. BLACKTAPE AWAKENS)