If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Chris Brown wrote:
In article , Tom Phillips wrote: Film can be exposed for hours. Try that with a digital sensor. It simply one of the differences between these two imaging mediums. You really should avoid such pontifications unless you're absolutely certain you're correct, as you aren't in this case. Canon's current DSLRs, to take one example, manage perfectly hapilly with multi-hour exposures. The only major problem is that holding the shutter open that long may drain the battery. The EOS 1v has a clever shutter mechanism that holds the shutter open with virtually no battery drain. I don't know if they've incorporated this into to the 10D/20D or into the higher end cameras. You can always use a grip with AA or rechargeable batteries in it for long exposures. Cheers, Alan -- -- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource: -- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.-- |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Tom Phillips wrote:
The ability of the canon EOS to do astrophotography is in part due to the employment of a larger pixel. Larger pixels mean a better signal and less noise, *but* (also Further, CMOS (Canon) is less prone to heating over long exposures than CCD based cameras. -- -- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource: -- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.-- |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Gymmy Bob wrote:
[] Bits and bytes are not involved in this thread previously. Only pixels vs. grain of film. How we represent a pixel is another matter. Aren't film grains "bits" in the sens that they can be either on or off? Cheers, David |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
John wrote:
[] Nope. The human eye is an analog mechanism. Photography is an effort to capture what the eyes can see in a relatively permanent medium. Digital is an effort to make money. Digital images are not analog nor are they permanent. It follows that digital is NOT photography. The eye has a digital connection to the brain.... David |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 11:28:29 GMT, Chris Brown
wrote: In article , Chris Brown wrote: In article , Tom Phillips wrote: Show me a "multi hour" digital exposure. OK, I'll take one tonight and upload it. Have to be of something indoors and boring, I'm afraid, as there's too much light pollution where I live to do such a long exposure outside, and the weather's pretty nasty atm as well. OK, I must admit, I'm having trouble with this. Anyone have any suggestions for a light source that will result in a decent exposure over a couple of hours, that I can easilly set up in an otherwise pitch-black room, and that won't result in either no image being recorded, or massive overexposure, at any sensible aperture? 1--a low wattage incandescent with a lot of neutral density filtering. If you can find a metalized mylar gift bag--I got mine at the local liquor store-- two or three thickess should cut the light down by 10000X or more. 2 a black light bulb with less filtering. This may blow out the blue channel but the green and red channel might turn out interesting. 3--your light poluted night sky after you raise the blind a couple inches 4---an old floppy disk taped over the camera lens plus your light poluted night sky. This is supposed to act as an infrared filter 5--something with a lcd placed in a box with a pin hole opening poked in the box. This is just a few suggestions that popped into my mind. jpc |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"David J Taylor" wrote in message ... Gymmy Bob wrote: [] Bits and bytes are not involved in this thread previously. Only pixels vs. grain of film. How we represent a pixel is another matter. Aren't film grains "bits" in the sens that they can be either on or off? Yes. And when measurements are made of small areas of the film, one is essentilaly counting grains of silver. It is the main noise source in that type of measurement. Cheers, David |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Marvin Margoshes wrote:
"David J Taylor" wrote in message [] Aren't film grains "bits" in the sens that they can be either on or off? Yes. And when measurements are made of small areas of the film, one is essentilaly counting grains of silver. It is the main noise source in that type of measurement. Thanks for confirming that. David |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"David J Taylor" wrote in message ... Marvin Margoshes wrote: "David J Taylor" wrote in message [] Aren't film grains "bits" in the sens that they can be either on or off? Yes. And when measurements are made of small areas of the film, one is essentilaly counting grains of silver. It is the main noise source in that type of measurement. Thanks for confirming that. There's a page on the Kodak site (sorry, I don't have the link) that claims that what we perceive as grain is statistical variations in the distribution of the grains. I.e. that the grains themselves are _much_ smaller than the frequency of the grain noise perceived. David J. Littleboy Tokyo, Japan |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Difficult technical question on ISO & light
Gregory W Blank wrote:
In article , Christopher Woodhouse wrote: For fine art work I am assuming that the eye can resolve 1 minute of arc (as a guideline) and my research was an exploration of the limits of digital cameras vs scanning primarily MF film. 1 minute at 10 feet, 100 feet or 1000 ? ;-) Distance is irrelevant if an angular measure is quoted. David |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Best accessory light for Canon Optura 40 ??? | roger beniot | Digital Photography | 0 | October 25th 04 07:23 AM |
Light struck colour paper? | Ken Hart | In The Darkroom | 1 | September 20th 04 11:06 PM |
f-stop to light transmission % ratio question | f/256 | In The Darkroom | 1 | January 25th 04 05:07 AM |
left/right light \ B&W kids portrait | zeitgeist | Photographing People | 9 | October 4th 03 10:37 AM |