Dan Mitchell wrote:
> Moose wrote:
>
>> I guess I must have missed the memo. Here I thought HDR was simply a way
>> of working around limited DR in film/sensor.
>>
>
> One thing that confuses me is that an "HDR" image actually has a lower
> dynamic range than the original scene did
Not in the 32 bit mode used by some HDR apps. I'm too lazy to do the
research and math, but I think 32 bits may be enough to encompass the
range from direct sun, as seen on a clear day through the atmosphere, to
below the lowest threshold of light for the adapted eye.
So the combined capture can be true HDR - in a file. What you are
dealing with is the lack of display technology to actually display
anything like the full range of brightness. Still, I think a system for
capturing it all deserves the term HDR.
Even slide film could hold more DR than most photo paper can display. CN
film and DSLRs considerably exceed that range. From fairly early on in
the development of film to now, one of the skills of a good photographer
has been to compress and/or clip that range of tones into a form that
reads as realistic to the human eye. That process is, for example, the
basic reason for being of the Zone System.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|