Re: HDR Photography: gimmick or reality?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jonathan Danforth" <jonathan@danforthsource.com>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca>
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 1:51 PM
Subject: HDR Photography: gimmick or reality?

> High Dynamic Range photography. This is far from a
> cutting edge technique but it's certainly newer than most
> of the processes we engage in and it seems to be a popular
> alternative process now that software has made the process
> of registration easier.
>
> http://www.flickr.com/groups/hdr/
>
> Basically, people shoot a bunch of frames of the same
> scene with varying exposures both under and over. Some
> artists are using tens of frames exposed at 1/3 stop
> intervals, some are using just three. Either way, I see
> HDR (when executed well) as a means to better demonstrate
> the acuity of the human eye. In my opinion, well done HDR
> images show what we really see as opposed to what the
> camera sees.
>
> As somebody who works in the confines of 2 stops of
> latitude (if I'm lucky) on a Becquerel Daguerreotype, I
> find this to be the holy grail. Yummy!
>
> Discuss...
>
> -Jonathan
>
> --
> http://photographs.danforthsource.com
>
   A couple of questions: 1, How large is the dymamic range
of film? By dynamic range I mean the range of scene
brightness that can be recorded.
2, What is the dynamic range of the reproduction? Here
dynamic range means the range of brightness in the
reproduction as seen by the eye? Specify the kind of
reproduction method you are writing about, specifically
transmission or reflection plus other characteristics.

These are only partly rhetorical.

---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com