Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #1953

Subject: [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #1953
From: Dirk Wright <wright@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 02:42:11 +0000
>
>Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2000 21:01:40 -0500
>From: Gregg Iverson <giverson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: [ot] slide vs neg D was Re: [OM] Kodachrome Scans
>
>Acer,
>
>Slide film does not have as much latitude as print or b&w film.  It cannot 
>reproduce in the same frame an exposure range from bright to dark that is 
>more than about 3 aperture stops or a magnitude of 8 from darkest to 
>lightest.  OTOH, negative film will capture a range of about 7 aperture 
>stops or a magnitude of 128 times as much light in the brightest areas as 
>are in the darkest.  I'm talking about detail in the shadow and highlight 
>areas.  Professionals shooting for advertisements used to use a mask to cut 
>down the range and extend the slide for use in print mediums.
>

But what about the prints from negatives? What is thier latitude? Also, what 
is the latitude of scanners? Pretty low I think...

The advantage of slides, at least for the older, traditional processes, were 
that one less reproduction step was required, which in the analog world is a 
big deal. Also, if you are viewing slides directly via projection, then you 
can't get any closer to the "real thing" since there are no further 
reproduction steps required. Every step in the analog imaging world 
introduces degradation of the image, so quality is higher the less steps you 
have. 

-- 
Be Seeing You.
Dirk Wright


< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz