[rollei_list] Re: O.T Polaroid type 55 b+W film and DIGITAL Photography

  • From: Laurence Cuffe <cuffe@xxxxxxx>
  • To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 07:53:23 +0000 (GMT)



On Mar 27, 2012, at 05:21 AM, Newhouse230@xxxxxxx wrote:


Yes Kirk,
Very nice gray scale .
 I can remember one of the full-time photographers who worked at Polaroid while I did shot an interior of the Old North Church (?) 
 in   Boston using a Speed Graphic and Polaroid positive/negative type 55 film.  He made a 16 x20 print  on Agfa Brovira. The tonality was exquisite;  the highlights  retained great detail as did the shadows. Some  prints are a such a thing of beauty,  that you always remember them even if the subject is relatively mundane.
 
    One area where digital capture still fails , in my opinion, is in the
dynamic range and the shape of tonal curve. It is pointed out that today's digital dynamic range for is equal or superior to slide films. This may be true, but it is not even close to color or black and white negative film.   I am forever cloning subtle detail into blown highlights of digital shots to get acceptable prints. The Polaroid negative produced by the Type 55 film of 45 years ago could produce some really beautiful images.
 
  To wander further O.T.  I wonder if one of the members with a more technical background can predict if/when the dynamic range and tonal curve of digital images will improve in the way that CD sound quality did.....going from a very 'clipped' quality to something that could yield improved audio nuance.  I am not an audiophile, so I don't know the technical terms, but to my ear CD's of early vintage completely lacked 'sweetness' and character but have improved over the years. I can't help but wonder if the same thing will be said for digital image capture.
 
 
Charlie Silverman 
 

It is, as I see it at this time, essentially a software problem.  Using a High dynamic range methodology, taking two or three frames in quick succession, it should be possible to capture the dynamic range of conventional films. This method has been used to produce deeply weird results which are a current internet photography meme, but it could also be used to produce a more conventional image with more shadow detail and less blown highlights.  This type of multiple frame image capture is already available in the mobile phone sector, and probably on some digital cameras, although I'm not aware of which ones.
In practice shooting I would expect the entire capture process to take place on a fractions of a second time scale, which might preclude very active shots, but which would cover most normal shooting. It would in principle be similar to the automatic bracketing that some high end film cameras indulge in if you let them.

All the best

Laurence Cuffe




 
In a message dated 3/27/2012 12:53:31 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, thompsonkirk@xxxxxxxxxxx writes:
Last week someone mentioned the BW Polaroid film that was used for view-camera exposure testing, but allowed you to preserve the Polaroid print and even its negative.  It yielded quite lovely tonal transitions – often better than the actual film exposure.  Perhaps you can still see this in a scan of a 4x5 Polaroid print:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/thompsonkirk/6212011748/in/photostream

(To Don Williams: The little print was scanned on the flatbed part of a Canon 9000F, and then enlarged.  I still use it for that.)

Kirk
=

Other related posts: