Subject: | Re: [OM] Phase 1 dynamic range |
---|---|
From: | "Brian Swale" <bj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Date: | Wed, 06 Jun 2012 23:06:25 +1200 |
Chuck wrote > A great photo but I don't understand this comment at all: "The extended > dynamic range of the Phase One reminds me of when I started using > transparency film." He implies that transparency film has extended > dynamic range. In fact, transparency film is inferior to negative film > for dynamic range. > > Chuck Norcutt Here's the complete text of what he wrote "The extended dynamic range of the Phase One reminds me of when I started using transparency film. It took me quite some time to be able to be able to accurately predict the behavior of this film and I am now going through this process again with the 13.5 stops Dynamic range available with the Phase One. Another of my Milford images. Cleddau River. Phase One. IQ 180. 28mm. Phase One lens." What he is saying that his ability to predict the range of the Phase 1 for any particular shot is not yet very good. It took him quite a while to get to be able to predict it for transparency film, and now he has to go through another learning process for the Phase 1. As I understand him.. Whether or not that constitutes an apology for blown highlights I'm not sure. Brian Swale. -- _________________________________________________________________ Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/ Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/ |
Previous by Date: | Re: [OM] Phase 1 dynamic range, Brian Swale |
---|---|
Next by Date: | [OM] (OT) Ethical dilemma, Bob Whitmire |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [OM] Phase 1 dynamic range, Brian Swale |
Next by Thread: | Re: [OM] Phase 1 dynamic range, Chuck Norcutt |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |