Serious thinking of the Pentax 645 or shall wait? Locked

Started May 4, 2014 | Discussions thread
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
This thread is locked.
Regular MemberPosts: 489Gear list
Re: Display
In reply to riknash, May 6, 2014

riknash wrote:

roustabout66 wrote:

Dave Luttmann wrote:

roustabout66 wrote:

Mako2011 wrote:

roustabout66 wrote:

You print more than most, yet you still claim the print medium is capable of exceeding 8 1/2 stops or even 12 stops. Where is the evidence of that? Where is a link proving that?

No, I said print is capable of displaying the detail (at both ends) of a high DR capture...even in cases in excess of 12 stops (paper and lighting paly a big part). Advances in Paper and printing technology/processing have made it a bit more common. Sorry if I wasn't clear. Also the actual DR of print has been increased in same cases. Fuji crystal papers would be an example. MOAB SlickRock metallic (vs simple gloss paper) is another example even consumer grade photo printers can get more DR from. KODAK PROFESSIONAL Inkjet Photo Paper, Metallic / 255g would be another paper that has an expanded DR vs older paper types. Seeing the comparison in person is really the only way to note the increase in an obvious way.

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Each end is not the problem, it's all that stuff in the middle. So you do not have any evidence (links). Only your own personal experience (feeling) to prove print medium is significantly better than 8 1/2 stops (or more importantly 12 stops). I have not tried the metallic yet, but I have a Fuji crystal print 20x30 and the DR of my Canon sensor is easily more than that print.

It is not relevant that prints are 6, 7, or 10 stops. The important part is having enough DR at the capture level in order to compress to print.

Besides, I sell prints....try selling your digital file.

I sell prints too Dave...have for over 40 years. I have also worked in one of the largest photo finishers in the Midwest, so I know that most of the "facts" in this thread are pure 100% propaganda.

Then you should certainly understand you want to capture the full range of a scene in order to make the print. The DR of the print is not relevant. The fact that you cant comprehend something so incredibly basic makes me question your basic knowledge of printing. I suggest you read Ansel Adams series on the negative and the print....the basic information there quite easily sums up why you want to capture the full range of a scene in order to compress and represent it on print. If you have been doing something've been doing it wrong for 40 years. I wouldn't brag about that if I were you.

I think i understand this discussion to mean that the DR of a print is limited, but by having a greater DR on the "negative", the artist decides which components of the "negative" will be represented, not including by how they in whole or in part will be modified or replaced by something completely different to realize the vision of the "photographer"/artist. Like many artists, the work is never finished but rather always in transition to try and discover a better representation of that vision.

Totally accurate. I am glad someone grasps that simple concept.

Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow