[pure-silver] Re: Today's Watercooler Discussion: Dynamic Range
- From: William Harting <wm.harting@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2011 17:48:59 -0500
Some of it looks like fill flash to me. In other words, unreal.
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 12:31 PM, Laurence Cuffe <cuffe@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Some of the Color reminds me of 1950's John Hind postcards. Probably much
> the same thinking was involved in their production too. A lot of the zone
> system was aimed at doing this in analog, and changing the effective curve
> used to reproduce the image. For some it gives brilliant results, but with
> others I find it too measured and cotrolled.
> All the best
> Laurence Cuffe
>
> On Jan 28, 2011, at 11:24 AM, Tim Daneliuk <tundra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Monochrome film photographers routinely handle well over 16 stops of light.
> Digital ... not so much. They resort to HDR techniques like this:
>
>
> http://www.perfectphotoblog.com/high-dynamic-range-images-hdri-before-and-after-landscapes/1201/
>
> I judge these to be quite beautiful but ... they don't look "real" to
> me. To my eye they seem more "surreal".
>
> So, here's the question: Is this a byproduct of the digital manipulation
> process OR are we so used to seeing color without a lot of dynamic
> range (even color film is pretty limited by comparison to B&W) that
> when we see a full dynamic range color image it seems "fake".
>
> Discuss amongst yourselves..
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Tim Daneliuk
> tundra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> =============================================================================================================
> To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your
> account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you
> subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there.
>
>
Other related posts:
