Digital BW, The Print

Thanks Steve and others who replied,

Do your arguments apply to top-end consumer cameras such as the Canon 
20d?  Or do we have to wait a while until the technology used in the 
pro cameras -- and the digital backs -- is available at 
a "reasonable" price?

Steve

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
<stevekale@b...> wrote:
> Hi Steve
> 
> Two comments:
> 
> 1.  Looking at the second part of your question, this is why we 
introduce
> gamma into the RAW conversion process.
> 
> 2. There is plenty of tonal range in today's 12 bit digital cameras.
> 
> Take a wander through Normen' site here:
> 
> http://www.normankoren.com/digital_tonality.html
> 
> It is not hard stuff and I think all your questions will be 
answered.  The
> only digital camera I have used (other than a pocket one) is the 
PhaseOne
> back.  It has plenty of dynamic range believe me.  My 1Ds MK II has 
arrived
> in Washington DC and I will pick it up in 2 weeks.  It won't be as 
good as
> the latest P25 but it sure as hell costs a lot less!
> 
> Steve
> 
> 
> > From: Stephen Kobrin <kobrins@w...>
> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 13:36:30 -0000
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Digital camera again
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >>  We must try to achieve the desired results with software after 
the
> >> fact.  I was a dedicated Tri-X user, and found I could not get 
the
> >> Tri-X "look" no matter how hard I tried.  I could emulate the
> > spectral
> >> sensitivity, but could not imitate what the Tri-X grain gives an
> >> image.  BUT, I also found I could "get over it" and learn to like
> > what
> >> I do get.  So basically you have to let go of the past.
> > 
> > 
> > Hi Clayton,
> > 
> > Resolution aside, I worry about two problems with digital capture 
for
> > B&W.  First, as I understand it, a digital sensor reacts much like
> > slide flim: a range limited to about five stops and a need to 
expose
> > for the highlights.  Second, again as I understand it (and I may 
not!)
> > the chip's sensitivity is linear while the progression of f stops 
is
> > not. Thus, close to half of the chip's "range" (not a technical 
term)
> > is taken up by the widest opening and by the time you get to the
> > fifth and smallest stop, not much is left.  The net effect of 
both of
> > these issue should be a constraint on tonal range and a loss of
> > detail in the shadows, vis-a-vis film.
> > 
> > Am I wrong?  Have you found this to be a problem?
> > 
> > Steve