Dynamic Range of Film still better than Digital Cameras?

[smoke665]

The expressive content of any art work is most important. If you believe that and you're the creator then you're happy to short change the craft/tech side because meh, who cares since it's not the most important thing?!! The two aren't opposed to each other. If you care about what you're trying to express then you'll do the best job you can expressing it.

And you also learn that it isn't always the equipment that makes an image art worthy. One only has to Google famous Pin Hole camera photographers you don't need $$$$$$ equipment to make beautiful art prints. There is an obsession with many today, that if "I buy the latest, greatest camera, I'll magically start producing masterpieces".

 

[Overread]

There is an obsession with many today, that if "I buy the latest, greatest camera, I'll magically start producing masterpieces".

I'm willing to bet this was being said back when we were cavemen and people were napping flint tools. I don't think its anything new with the current generations.


There are always and have always been those who think that having the best gear will make them great at a skill; there are always those who can produce amazing things with basic tools. I just don't think that the whole hobby has to operate by such a limited viewpoint.
Better tools do increase what we can do; better personal skills can also unlock new potential in situations that we might otherwise have thought impossible. BOTH sides of the coin are important.

 

[smoke665]

There are always and have always been those who think that having the best gear will make them great at a skill; there are always those who can produce amazing things with basic tools. I just don't think that the whole hobby has to operate by such a limited viewpoint.
Better tools do increase what we can do; better personal skills can also unlock new potential in situations that we might otherwise have thought impossible. BOTH sides of the coin are important.

I didn't advocate throwing out my gear, I said "that we might be reaching the limit for practical application on DR. Ive read the average untrained human eye is only capable of registering 10-14 stops.....we're there now". Something else not mentioned is sharpness. During the 70's I freelanced forensic work for the SO and several attorneys. I would have given anything for today's super sharp glass and camera capabilities, but that's a different genre. I shoot mostly portrait work now, I'm a fanatic on sharp eyes in a portrait, but the need for sharpness goes down rapidly when you get to blushing, pimple filled cheeks. There's no real need for high DR in studio because you're managing it with auxiliary lighting. You do the same thing outside, care to guess how many shots where required, how many reflectors and flashes were required to manage the DR on this off the chart shot shiny chrome and paint? One large reflector, multiple shots and a lot of blending in PS.
55 Pontiac20220904_5684-Edit.jpg by William Raber, on Flickr

How about mid day on the beach? One shot, one large collapsable reflector.
Beach Girl.jpg by William Raber, on Flickr

Depending on who you're looking at the K1MII is rated in the 12-13 stops DR, ask me how many times I've missed a shot because of any limitation on DR. Unfortunately there is a large segment of the population that sees photography "skill" as being based on the $$$$ they spend on the equipment. They take the shot, the camera does everything for them, they slap on some preset and say "look how good I am". Unfortunately they never take the time to learn even the basics.....Exposure, light, composition, etc. instead they buy a new toy, that guarantees they will be a master at the craft. Before long they tire of the toy, never having found the real joy in the craft.

 

[Ysarex]

And you also learn that it isn't always the equipment that makes an image art worthy. One only has to Google famous Pin Hole camera photographers you don't need $$$$$$ equipment to make beautiful art prints. There is an obsession with many today, that if "I buy the latest, greatest camera, I'll magically start producing masterpieces".

I've yet to meet a pinhole photographer, and I've known quite a few, who took up pinhole because they couldn't afford a lens. The arts require craft and tools employed by the artist to create their expression. Artists practice their craft and build, purchase or acquire quality tools because they care about their work and want to do the best job they can. It's never an either or choice such that if they acquire good tools or become proficient using them then their artistic expression suffers. It is the opposite. Craft and tools support the artistic expression. Quality craft and tools never make an image art worthy -- but they often make art worthy images possible.

 

[Ysarex]

I didn't advocate throwing out my gear, I said "that we might be reaching the limit for practical application on DR.

I would welcome having more and I would certainly make use of it if I did.

Ive read the average untrained human eye is only capable of registering 10-14 stops.....we're there now". Something else not mentioned is sharpness. During the 70's I freelanced forensic work for the SO and several attorneys. I would have given anything for today's super sharp glass and camera capabilities, but that's a different genre. I shoot mostly portrait work now, I'm a fanatic on sharp eyes in a portrait, but the need for sharpness goes down rapidly when you get to blushing, pimple filled cheeks. There's no real need for high DR in studio because you're managing it with auxiliary lighting. You do the same thing outside, care to guess how many shots where required, how many reflectors and flashes were required to manage the DR on this off the chart shot shiny chrome and paint? One large reflector, multiple shots and a lot of blending in PS.
55 Pontiac20220904_5684-Edit.jpg by William Raber, on Flickr

How about mid day on the beach? One shot, one large collapsable reflector.
Beach Girl.jpg by William Raber, on Flickr

Depending on who you're looking at the K1MII is rated in the 12-13 stops DR, ask me how many times I've missed a shot because of any limitation on DR. Unfortunately there is a large segment of the population that sees photography "skill" as being based on the $$$$ they spend on the equipment. They take the shot, the camera does everything for them, they slap on some preset and say "look how good I am". Unfortunately they never take the time to learn even the basics.....Exposure, light, composition, etc. instead they buy a new toy, that guarantees they will be a master at the craft. Before long they tire of the toy, never having found the real joy in the craft.

 

[smoke665]

Craft and tools support the artistic expression. Quality craft and tools never make an image art worthy -- but they often make art worthy images possible.

No the skill of the artist/photographer , and occasionally a little luck make an image art worthy. Even a blind pig in the woods can find an acorn every now and then. Those skilled at their craft can always turn something into an art worthy product, regardless of the tools they use.

Like the film vs digital debate, this has digressed into an artist skill vs equipment debate that isn't going anywhere but further off the rails from the original OP's post. Time for me to bow out. My apologies to the OP.

 

[Ysarex]

No the skill of the artist/photographer

You say skill of the artist/photographer and I say craft; "The arts require craft and tools employed by the artist to create their expression." When you say "skill of the photographer" it's fair to assume you don't mean in playing the piano. You mean skill using a camera and there's the tool. That's craft and tools and artists take their craft and tools seriously because they're serious about their art.

, and occasionally a little luck make an image art worthy. Even a blind pig in the woods can find an acorn every now and then. Those skilled at their craft can always turn something into an art worthy product, regardless of the tools they use.

Like the film vs digital debate, this has digressed into an artist skill vs equipment debate

Skill versus equipment is a false dichotomy. An artist's skill includes skill using their equipment. Ceramicists can't make ceramics without wheels and kilns and glazes and skill using them, painters can't make paintings without paint and brushes and palettes and skill using them, musicians can't make music without instruments and skill using them, photographers can't make photographs without cameras and lenses and skill using them, etc....

that isn't going anywhere but further off the rails from the original OP's post. Time for me to bow out. My apologies to the OP.