Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/12/05

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] 35mm color vs. the tyranny of the masses
From: Dante Stella <dante@umich.edu>
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 06:39:44 -0500
References: <E99B16C4-26E7-11D8-9384-0003938C439E@btinternet.com> <11FDD418-26EF-11D8-90AA-003065D6E648@umich.edu> <DB6E1160-26F5-11D8-B6ED-000A958F513A@jphotog.com>

On Dec 5, 2003, at 2:37 AM, Eric Welch wrote:

> Here's one inaccuracy in your text:
>
>
> "-- Film has a much higher dynamic range than digital - 15 stops on 
> TMY, or a 32768:1 ratio. That means that you capture everything in the 
> scene and can go back and adjust up or down at will later."
>
> Not true. Film - even black and white, does NOT contain all details in 
> a scene. Even ideally processed, it will not be able to cover the 
> dynamic range of many, many scenes, especially contrast daylight. 
> Neither can digital. But that's my point. Neither of them can, and 
> film is not better.
>

I've observed that captures everything you can see, which is more than 
I can say for the current crop of 6MP cameras shooting in monochrome 
(or even color).  The Kodak 14N seems to be able to do more, but it's 
not a mainstream product for amateurs (or, I guess, even 
professionals).  You can hit a higher number in a scene, I've observed 
(with a Zone VI meter), if you put the sun in the frame.  I would be 
curious to see how the ends of a wider range are anchored.

> There are plenty of other questionable statements. Like 120 outlasting 
> 35mm film. I don't believe that for a moment. There are already 
> digital medium format backs that give film a run for the money.
>

That's not a statement; that's a speculation.  You don't have to 
believe it, but I don't have to believe that $8,000-12,000 for a 
36x36mm back (to say nothing of the camera) is comparable to $400 for a 
55x55mm frame for the purposes of someone who doesn't get to write 
equipment off.  I think that it is a legitimate question whether the 
economy of scale for larger digital backs is such that they will ever 
be in a price range to compete economically with even expensive 
conventional MF equipment.  This statement is not pointed at people who 
have unlimited budgets.

____________
Dante Stella
http://www.dantestella.com

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

Replies: Reply from Eric Welch <eric@jphotog.com> (Re: [Leica] 35mm color vs. the tyranny of the masses)
Reply from Mark Rabiner <mark@rabinergroup.com> (Re: [Leica] 35mm color vs. the tyranny of the masses)
Reply from Tina Manley <images@InfoAve.Net> (Re: [Leica] ww.imagingrevue.com - Experience/Opionions ?)
In reply to: Message from Frank Dernie <Frank.Dernie@btinternet.com> (Re: [Leica] Thom Hogan's photo predictions for 2004)
Message from Dante Stella <dante@umich.edu> ([Leica] 35mm color vs. the tyranny of the masses)
Message from Eric Welch <eric@jphotog.com> (Re: [Leica] 35mm color vs. the tyranny of the masses)