My Early Experiments in HDR

Annika1980 wrote:
I have 11 HDR subjects on display, ranging from neon-lit shops at night
in a storm to open flames in a BBQ grill.

Getting the flames to line up with perfect registration must've been a
real bitch.

LOL, of course they are not lined up in these photos, though some
overlap exists. This gives the flames a ghostly appearance.

I plan to experiment with candle flame in a still, dark room sometime
in the next week.

Matt Clara wrote:
"Annika1980" wrote in message
This is where digital really has it over film.
Had I been shooting film either the highlights in the sky would've been
blown or the foreground would be way too dark.
By combining the images we get a usable pic.


Forgive me if I say, you must not have much experience with film--even if it
had lost detail at either end, with five pics covering that range of stops,
it wouldn't have been a problem in any case.

Ok, let's assume that the 5 digital exposures were at 1/100, 1/50,
1/25, 1/13, & 1/6 of a second.
Which one of these settings would you recommend for the film shot?

This is where digital really has it over film.

You are so full of ****, it's laughable.

Oh really? You got any film shots that cover a 5-stop range in one
pic?

Matt Clara wrote:

2 hours--christ, man, you must work for the state, like me!

You guys will get indigestion, bolting your food like that. You should
consider moving to Spain. We know how to do lunch properly here :-)

"Annika1980" wrote in message
ups.com...

Matt Clara wrote:
"Annika1980" wrote in message
This is where digital really has it over film.
Had I been shooting film either the highlights in the sky would've been
blown or the foreground would be way too dark.
By combining the images we get a usable pic.


Forgive me if I say, you must not have much experience with film--even if
it
had lost detail at either end, with five pics covering that range of
stops,
it wouldn't have been a problem in any case.

Ok, let's assume that the 5 digital exposures were at 1/100, 1/50,
1/25, 1/13, & 1/6 of a second.
Which one of these settings would you recommend for the film shot?


None, or rather, all--just take the same five shots, scan and combine, same
as digital. Digital's got nothing on film there, except you don't have to
scan digital, further, with a low contrast negative film, you could probably
get away with just two shots, combine and scan, as digital has less latitude
than negative film.

--
Regards,
Matt Clara
www.mattclara.com

"Annika1980" wrote in message
oups.com...
This is where digital really has it over film.

You are so full of ****, it's laughable.

Oh really? You got any film shots that cover a 5-stop range in one
pic?


Your shot didn't cover five stops in one pic, either, you took five separate
photographs and combined them in your computer--the only advantage digital
has in this case is the fact that it doesn't need to be scanned. So, he's
right, you are full of ****. You're not really contesting that, though, are
you?

--
Regards,
Matt Clara
www.mattclara.com

Matt Clara wrote:
"Annika1980" wrote in message

Ok, let's assume that the 5 digital exposures were at 1/100, 1/50,
1/25, 1/13, & 1/6 of a second.
Which one of these settings would you recommend for the film shot?


None, or rather, all--just take the same five shots, scan and combine, same
as digital.

Exactly. Then it would be digital, not film. And now you can get the
results digitally rather than rely on the analog image from film.
Which is exactly what I said.

There are many advantages of turning your film images into digital by
scanning them ( a very tedious, time-consuming process, BTW).
So why not start them in the digital domain?
The only advantage I can see of turning digital images into film is for
long term storage.

I'm cureently working on a project that involves scanning 120 slides
for a digital DVD slideshow. Like I said, this is where digital really
has it over film.

"Annika1980" wrote in message
ups.com...

Ok, let's assume that the 5 digital exposures were at 1/100, 1/50,
1/25, 1/13, & 1/6 of a second.
Which one of these settings would you recommend for the film shot?

Whew. Talk about out of touch.

"Annika1980" wrote in message
oups.com...

2 wrote:


Ok, let's assume that the 5 digital exposures were at 1/100, 1/50,
1/25, 1/13, & 1/6 of a second.
Which one of these settings would you recommend for the film shot?

Whew. Talk about out of touch.

Yeah it was a trick question. Film is dead!
LOL!

Film will be dead when digital can do better. That's a long way off.

Besides, didn't you say that the best way to archive digital is to make it
on film?

Annika1980 wrote:
This is where digital really has it over film.

You are so full of ****, it's laughable.

Oh really? You got any film shots that cover a 5-stop range in one
pic?

He'd show you, but he's too busy LOLing at you to defend his point.