Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/12/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 12:29 PM 12/15/2002 -0500, you wrote: >Wilfred, > > > White balance and overall color fidelity is often > > superior to film in good digital cameras, > >I believe you are misusing the word "fidelity". Fidelity means "accuracy of >reproduction". It is physically impossible for digital cameras using Bayer >pattern sensors to have higher "fidelity" than film (unless they have a LOT >of sensors, and 11M sensors doesn't come close), simply because of the color >interpolation that happens due to the Bayer pattern sensor. I have noticed that images shot with digital seem to be missing some of the finer detail captured on slide film. I am assuming it is this color interpolation doing it. I borrowed an EOS 1D to shoot some hockey this weekend. When shot at 400asa the details in the material of the jerseys seem to be missing. Using the same lens, E200 pushed to EI 400 seems to capture more details in the Jerseys, such as the fine stiching. It is really noticable with the red jerseys. Look at the sample image on the EOS 1D web page. In the Jockey picture the red jersey has no detail, just a blob of red. Its a big tiff file and takes a while to download. http://www.usa.canon.com/EOS-1D/sample.html I would also argue that digital adds a lot to the work flow for somebody that is not on a tight deadline. Shooting at 8fps and high quality creates a lot of files that take a lot of time to open and decide whether to delete or keep. With slides, I develop them by machine, edit on a light table and throw out the rejects. I can view a slide in a few seconds using a loupe. Opening a file, closing it and then deleting it probably averages to ten or fifteen seconds each file. Not to mention dragging a laptop to the venue to download the images and start some of the editing. One more thing to carry. Regards, Robert >Now, the color may LOOK better/cleaner etc. to some, but that is not >something you can attribute to "fidelity". > > > Negative film can still capture a wider range of light than any > > non-scanning digital sensor I've seen or read about thus far. > >Hum. What are the ranges you are seeing? My information shows they are >equal, with an edge on digital, especially for color. For B&W, they are the >same, pretty much, but you have to use compression and compensating >development to get that many stops on the film...but it is do-able. > >Regards, > >Austin > >-- >To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html