/p/ - Photography » Thread #3084843

[21 / 6 / ?]

jakub Sun 28 May 2017 16:56:01 No.3084843 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>3084847 >>3084848 >>3084972 >>3084978 >>3085045 >>3085426

What film has the best dynamic range? I've just bought an EOS 5, wanting to shoot film as well as digi for the better range and muh aesthetic

pic related, lifted off a RPT as an example of the shit I want to achieve

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 28 May 2017 17:08:18 No.3084847 Report

Quoted By: >>3084906

>>3084843
Well exposed film will give you a large dynamic range, better than most of the digital camera
So I'd say any film

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 28 May 2017 17:12:54 No.3084848 Report

Quoted By: >>3084906 >>3084918

>>3084843
Portra 400 has great dynamic range.

jakub

jakub Sun 28 May 2017 18:43:21 No.3084906 Report

Quoted By: >>3084918

>>3084847
As long as it's better than digi it'd be worth it
>>3084848
Alright cheers, I'll have to try that

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 28 May 2017 19:00:54 No.3084918 Report

Quoted By:

>>3084906
Hehe it wont be hard
>>3084848
I'm de acuerdo with you, Portra is my favorite emulsion.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 28 May 2017 20:20:30 No.3084970 Report

Quoted By: >>3084971

Digital is actually better than most film at this point, just at the opposite end of the scale.

Where film does amazingly well with highlights, it crushes shadows and looks like shit. Where digital clips highlights, it does amazingly well with shadows.

Also, the highest dynamic range isn't due to the film, but the developer. There are some low contrast-high DR developers that can pull out 19 or 20 usable stops of dynamic range.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 28 May 2017 20:29:00 No.3084971 Report

Quoted By:

>>3084970
Thank for the knowledge

crl !fn4xOhE7ak

crl !fn4xOhE7ak Sun 28 May 2017 20:29:24 No.3084972 Report

Quoted By: >>3084998 >>3085045

>>3084843

I took this. Used Portra 160 overexposed at 80, meter for the shadows.

!QSnkIfyEps

!QSnkIfyEps Sun 28 May 2017 20:49:11 No.3084978 Report

Quoted By:

>>3084843
Kodak Portra 400, or (personally) Fujifilm Natura 800.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 28 May 2017 21:39:56 No.3084998 Report

Quoted By: >>3085011 >>3085045

>>3084972
Pretty good pull anon

crl !fn4xOhE7ak

crl !fn4xOhE7ak Sun 28 May 2017 21:57:51 No.3085011 Report

Quoted By: >>3085045

>>3084998
hey thanks

although not technically a pull because I had the lab develop for 160 and not 80, therefor overexposing.

vosh !35mmF/4Qi6

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Bild009_Neg.Nr.8A.jpg, 369KiB, 667x1000

vosh !35mmF/4Qi6 Sun 28 May 2017 22:00:44 No.3085014 Report

Quoted By:

Another vote for Portra 400. Always performs well.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO untitled.jpg, 625KiB, 2001x657

Anonymous Sun 28 May 2017 22:37:55 No.3085045 Report

Quoted By:

>>3084972
>>3084998
>>3085011
>>3084843
For color, it's Portra 160/400, as far as I know.
pic related is portra 160 @ 100

B&W I don't know. N-4 developed Tri-x or 2-bath-developed with high and low concentration of developer?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 02310037.jpg, 5MiB, 3130x2075

Anonymous Mon 29 May 2017 14:14:43 No.3085386 Report

Quoted By:

soooo , how percentage do you guys think what determine the dynamic range?

50% film : 50% developer or else?

*mistakenly metering by over 5 1/2 stop, the negative come out really dark (agfa vista 400)

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 29 May 2017 15:39:22 No.3085426 Report

Quoted By: >>3085478

>>3084843
Kodak Kodachrome

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 06.jpg, 481KiB, 900x1103

Anonymous Mon 29 May 2017 16:37:24 No.3085478 Report

Quoted By: >>3085481

>>3085426
This is not true. Kodachrome had some of the worst dynamic range of any film.

Pic related

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 29 May 2017 16:48:10 No.3085481 Report

Quoted By: >>3085514

>>3085478
>post perfect picture with stunning colors
>boyz kodachrome was so bad!
get new eyes, faggot.

https://pavelkosenko.wordpress.com/2012/03/28/4x5-kodachromes/

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO anbmeO5_700b.jpg, 55KiB, 634x440

https://pavelkosenko.wordpress.com/2012/03/28/4x5-kodachromes/ Mon 29 May 2017 17:26:26 No.3085514 Report

Quoted By: >>3085525 >>3085555

>>3085481
Kodachrome is well known for its limited dynamic range. Hence this exemple is underexposed and lit by a flash in daylight. Notice how the shadows are crushed blacks?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 29 May 2017 17:39:53 No.3085525 Report

Quoted By:

>>3085514

dis guy is right but he's also just proving the dynamic range meme needs to end

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 29 May 2017 18:23:15 No.3085555 Report

Quoted By: >>3085571

>>3085514
>hurzzz why hard shadowz under heavy mid day sun?
dont be such a mongoloid.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 29 May 2017 18:44:52 No.3085571 Report

Quoted By:

>>3085555

>not being digisheep and having everything be the same mushy gray yellow brown

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches