Re: Interesting Reference Data on Dynamic Range - 5dsr
RustyBug wrote:
+1 @ YMMV
My point was that the limited DR of chrome had qualities to it that were favored over DR by ... IDK, millions of folks. Conversely, millions preferred the DR of negative print film.
YOU may ALWAYS favor more DR. There is countless historical evidence that more DR is not ALWAYS BETTER. I mean, just in case you never heard of it, there was this film called Kodachrome and there were one or two folks that liked it. Funny thing ... they paid more for it and got less DR than they could from negatives. Surely, folks that took images for Nat Geo, etc. would ALWAYS want more DR because more DR is ALWAYS better ... isn\'t that right?
Diff courses, diff horses.
So, how about those 0-2 EV comps? Did the extra DR make them ALWAYS BETTER?
I suspect there are two different discussions happening here. One is an artistic discussion about what makes a good looking photograph. The other is a technical discussion about whether or not extra DR stored in a file is useful. It is a different discussion than the film days since we can essentially change film after the exposure. You can get high DR or low DR from the same file. So, in that aspect, I agree with chez. If extra DR comes with no compromise, I\'m sure most would agree that is a good thing to have stores in the files even if you never use it. Since things never come without compromise, it is a much more involved discussion of individual wants/needs.
Aug 17, 2015 at 10:43 AM
Previous versions of jctriguy's message #13154368 « Interesting Reference Data on Dynamic Range - 5dsr »
