It was 4/3/04 10:38 am, when Joanna Plumbe Photography wrote:

> Thanks for all the responses.  I've spent 13 years shooting this type of
> stuff on colour neg, and have always been amazed how well it copes with
> difficult lighting situations.

Joanna

What color neg have you been using? When I have shot color in the theatre, I
have found the ASA to be a limiting factor because of the slow tungsten
balanced stock. Also, is it simply a case of the neg capturing what you see
or are there tweaks (i.e. filteration) being applied at the printing stage
to compensate for deficiencies?

> I've just been having a foray recently into
> the production stuff with my 1Ds's as it would be just too convenient for
> words to be able to get away with it.  Sadly though, I think the bottom line
> is that the sensor just can't handle what it's being asked to do.

What "scientific" tests have you done to conclude the above? Please share
them as I am personally interested. It may be that the 1Ds is actually
giving you more accurate color reproduction! It just so happens the results
aren't as appealing as the film originated images because they have had
filteration applied to them at the printing stage.

You can also have your camera profiled or yourself tweak the profile that
Camera Raw II uses for your camera so that it gives you results that are
closer to the film originated output (that's before you do any tweaks in
Photoshop). Not familiar with Capture One (?) that most Canon owners prefer.
Maybe that gives you similar options.

>> Similarly, I suspect you may be able to tweak a 1Ds or a 14n
>> (CMOS) to give you smoother gradations in your shadows and highlights
> How would I do this?

By having the camera profiled or the firmware tweaked. I know Fuji don't do
firmware tweaks through Internet downloads but they will if I send the
camera to them. Not sure what the Canon stance is. But there are bound to be
some trade offs, I would've thought. IAC, you may end up with a body that's
almost useless for anything else!

> Thank you to everyone for your input.  I'm pleased to say I don't think it's
> anything I've been doing wrong, and I'm sad to say I think it's a limitation
> of the equipment.

Perhaps...<g> Please take the above with a pinch of salt. I'm an artist and
not a technician. ;-)

> I don't know the technical reasons behind this but obviously the
> sensor reacts in a totally different way when bombarded with hefty amounts
> of colour/contrast.

The sensor sees only black and white (after filtering), as far as I can make
out. It's the software that then translates the captured digits into color.
If the software that's doing the translating can be tweaked (and it can),
you will get different results. That's why, I think, it's difficult to
support blanket statements.


My tupence worth...


Shangara Singh.
__________________________________________________

:: Photoshop CS Adobe Certified Expert (ACE)
:: Photoshop CS Essential Tips && ACE Exam Aids && Glossary
:: http://www.photoshopace.com && http://www.examaids.com



===============================================================
GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE

Reply via email to