vicmortelmans
Well-known
Hi,
This is an experiment I did:
- displayed an SMPTE test image on a PC monitor (LCD), such that (to the eye) the 5% white and 5% black squares are visible. (look here for an example: http://brighamrad.harvard.edu/research/topics/vispercep/tutorial.html; you may have to adjust monitor brightness/contrast to see the squares!)
- took a picture of the monitor (no ambient light) with average metering on my regular b&w film
- developed and scanned the film according to normal processing
Looking at the raw scanning result, the 5% white (max density on film) square is visible, but the 5% black (low density) is not. This area is quite grainy as well. I should have bracketed the shot to try out higher exposure, but it's actually confirming what I see in shadow area's in my regular shots.
Would this be normal? I thought that the brigthness range of a monitor is much lower than of a real-life subject. If my film/developing/scanning process can't reproduce detail that is visibly displayed on a monitor, how can it ever satisfactory reproduce a real life scene?
I'm having trouble finetuning my processing to improve quality, but looking at this result, it seems like I'm still far off...
Maybe someone can redo the experiment to check against his film/developing/scanning process, or check with digital?
And how can I improve shadow detail? Just rate the film at half or 1/4 ISO?
Groeten,
Vic
This is an experiment I did:
- displayed an SMPTE test image on a PC monitor (LCD), such that (to the eye) the 5% white and 5% black squares are visible. (look here for an example: http://brighamrad.harvard.edu/research/topics/vispercep/tutorial.html; you may have to adjust monitor brightness/contrast to see the squares!)
- took a picture of the monitor (no ambient light) with average metering on my regular b&w film
- developed and scanned the film according to normal processing
Looking at the raw scanning result, the 5% white (max density on film) square is visible, but the 5% black (low density) is not. This area is quite grainy as well. I should have bracketed the shot to try out higher exposure, but it's actually confirming what I see in shadow area's in my regular shots.
Would this be normal? I thought that the brigthness range of a monitor is much lower than of a real-life subject. If my film/developing/scanning process can't reproduce detail that is visibly displayed on a monitor, how can it ever satisfactory reproduce a real life scene?
I'm having trouble finetuning my processing to improve quality, but looking at this result, it seems like I'm still far off...
Maybe someone can redo the experiment to check against his film/developing/scanning process, or check with digital?
And how can I improve shadow detail? Just rate the film at half or 1/4 ISO?
Groeten,
Vic