I still say that you cannot capture on digital as wide a scenic dynamic range as you can with the best films and film techniques in that regard. I think several people here are confusing the dynamic range of the negative with the dynamic range of the scene captured on the negative. They are not the same thing because the negative does not necessarily have to be linear capture/playback. There can be companding going on which will allow greater range to be captured than the range of negative densities created.
jco -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter Lacus Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 2:54 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: beauty shot: Pentax K10D- 17mm lenses are out there Godfrey, >>...(lack of artificial look also playing significant role).. > > > A digital camera can produce any look you want. It's all in the image > processing. And that's not something learned overnight. The more you > do, the better your results will be. unfortunately, I can't agree completely. Some limitations are built-in to system and you can't overcome them easily (Nyquist frequency, pixels arranged in [Bayer] matrix) and when they play together against you, some artificial flavour to picture is pretty much inevitable (such as moire or aliasing). Indeed film does have its' own set of limitations as well (for example limited dynamic range) but I'm used to them. Of course I expect my skills will improve over time (I can now produce better results using ACR than one month ago) but I expect the RAW converters will improve as well. :-) However I don't expect miracles - rendering on film will always be different than on digital IMHO. Not better nor worse, just different... Cheers, Peter -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
