Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Dynamic Range & Resolution  (Read 8131 times)

1IRISHBOY

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 86
    • http://
Dynamic Range & Resolution
« on: March 29, 2006, 03:04:30 PM »

I shoot birds (mostly) and strive for good dynamic range and resolution with my 1-4L IS and 20D.

I just bought a R-1800 to better veiw the results. I have noticed that many pros are using semi and matte paper. It seems this would demish the results. What is the advantage they see and I don't?
Logged

robjr

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11
    • http://robertrodriguezjr.com
Dynamic Range & Resolution
« Reply #1 on: March 29, 2006, 03:25:27 PM »

It's all a matter of taste and preference, but matte papers in general create a more painterly effect, rich warm colors, and to me, greater depth than luster or gloss papers. It is rather subjective, but after trying many gloss, luster, and matte finishes, I like the effect that matte papers give to my landcsape images. Others also comment about how they don't look like traditional photographs, and have more of a glow to them. There is also the issue of archival quality and print longetivity, and here many matte papers also exceed due to their lack of chemical brighteners and coatings. A search will provide many past discussions...hope that helps.
Logged
Robert Rodriguez Jr Photography
Landscape Images of the Hudson Valley and Beyond

JeffKohn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1670
    • http://jeffk-photo.typepad.com
Dynamic Range & Resolution
« Reply #2 on: March 29, 2006, 03:47:35 PM »

I've found that it depends on the image type. For images that are dominated mostly by midtones, the rag papers are really nice, especially for images where you want to bring out texture (feathers, fur, tree bark, sand, etc). It really does give them a depth, sometimes almost like looking through a window.

Where the matte papers don't work quite as well IMHO is for extremely high-contrast images and/or when you need a really high DMAX to preserve shadow details. Images ranging from deep shadows to bright highlights can be somewhat disappointing on rag paper to me. For these images I prefer a satin/luster paper which gives you a greater dmax and contrast range. Glossy papers are another option here, but I find the issue of glare to be problematic unless the print will be displayed in highy-controlled lighting conditions (which most rooms in a typical home do not have).

1IRISHBOY

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 86
    • http://
Dynamic Range & Resolution
« Reply #3 on: March 29, 2006, 10:36:28 PM »

Where the matte papers don't work quite as well IMHO is for extremely high-contrast images and/or when you need a really high DMAX to preserve shadow details. Images ranging from deep shadows to bright highlights can be somewhat disappointing on rag paper to me. For these images I prefer a satin/luster paper which gives you a greater dmax and contrast range. Glossy papers are another option here, but I find the issue of glare to be problematic unless the print will be displayed in highy-controlled lighting conditions (which most rooms in a typical home do not have).


Jeff, I think you hit the nail on the head, at least for me. I try to shoot using morning and evening light for shadows, highlights and warm colors with good depth. At the same time I must maintain the sharp hook in the Eagles beak with good contrast against the sky and not lose the hawks gleam in the eye. Sutle shadows on the chest of a Goldfinch while maintaining vivid yellows in the brite sun portion. While I did produce a Monet-ish print of a tight cropped Heron flying though brush that indeed would be better rendered on matte, most of my shots are high contrast wide dynamic range with often brilliant colors. I will on your suggestion however try some Premium Luster from Epson as lighting issues are real at home and on exhibit.  

Jeff Iam not familiar with the terms IMHO and DMAX. Can you explain?
Thanks         Bill McCrystyn
« Last Edit: March 29, 2006, 10:57:57 PM by 1IRISHBOY »
Logged

Lisa Nikodym

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1706
    • http://www.stanford.edu/~melkor/lisa_pictures/lisa_pictures.html
Dynamic Range & Resolution
« Reply #4 on: March 30, 2006, 11:43:28 AM »

Quote
Jeff Iam not familiar with the terms IMHO and DMAX. Can you explain?

I can answer those for you.  IMHO is shorthand for "in my honest opinion".  Dmax is a number which describes the maximum possible dynamic range of a paper/ink combination.  Higher Dmax is better, and means whiter whites and/or blacker blacks.

Lisa

DarkPenguin

  • Guest
Dynamic Range & Resolution
« Reply #5 on: March 30, 2006, 12:01:05 PM »

Quote
I can answer those for you.  IMHO is shorthand for "in my honest opinion".  Dmax is a number which describes the maximum possible dynamic range of a paper/ink combination.  Higher Dmax is better, and means whiter whites and/or blacker blacks.

Lisa
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=61371\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I thought it was "in my humble opinion".
Logged

bob mccarthy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 372
    • http://
Dynamic Range & Resolution
« Reply #6 on: March 30, 2006, 12:04:14 PM »

IMHO is "in my humble opinion". Since it's the internet, it's a bit tongue in cheek.

No honesty in net talk.

DMAX is Density Maximum or a statement on the maximum darkness (black) in the print.

DR is density range, lightest light to darkest dark. You're right because matte is perceived to have trouble with really dark blacks (Dmax), glossy is concidered to have wider range. Some of the latest inks are closing the gap.

bob
« Last Edit: March 30, 2006, 12:13:33 PM by bob mccarthy »
Logged

1IRISHBOY

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 86
    • http://
Dynamic Range & Resolution
« Reply #7 on: March 30, 2006, 01:11:28 PM »

DMAX is Density Maximum or a statement on the maximum darkness (black) in the print.

DR is density range, lightest light to darkest dark. You're right because matte is perceived to have trouble with really dark blacks (Dmax), glossy is concidered to have wider range. Some of the latest inks are closing the gap.


Thanks EVERYONE for your humble honesty. I was worried because I never had checked for IMHO in my prints and was afraid I had missed something. DR, being an old audio file, relates to me as dynamic range (Lisa) which I am looking for. In music it being the lowest to highest notes available. The less "noise" typically the better the dynamic range. I can see here (paper/ink) where it would be best described as denisty. PPI / DPI.

Were do I look for this spec? As I mentioned I'm using an R1800. What would be some suggestions for ink / paper combos with DR in mine? Are these specs weighted, filtered or conditioned in anyway?

Bill
Logged

Tim Gray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2002
    • http://www.timgrayphotography.com
Dynamic Range & Resolution
« Reply #8 on: March 30, 2006, 01:42:16 PM »

Quote
In music it being the lowest to highest notes available. The less "noise" typically the better the dynamic range. [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=61380\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

High note to low note refers to frequency response, not dynamic range.
Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10687
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Dynamic Range & Resolution
« Reply #9 on: March 30, 2006, 01:43:07 PM »

Quote
Thanks EVERYONE for your humble honesty. I was worried because I never had checked for IMHO in my prints and was afraid I had missed something.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=61380\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I always add an additional 17.3 units of IMHO to every print.  
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my photo website. New images each season. Also visit my new website: http://ericneedsakidney.org

1IRISHBOY

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 86
    • http://
Dynamic Range & Resolution
« Reply #10 on: March 30, 2006, 02:06:16 PM »

I have found a gigabyte of TLC works well.  
Logged

1IRISHBOY

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 86
    • http://
Dynamic Range & Resolution
« Reply #11 on: March 30, 2006, 02:25:54 PM »

Quote
High note to low note refers to frequency response, not dynamic range.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=61383\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Technically you are right, but the two are inseperable in a "practical sense". Less "noise" (dynamic range/signal to noise ratio) will improve - usable - (listenable), is that a word,  frequency response in Hz.

Sorry, pardon my sloppy anology. I was just trying to relate a laymens thinking to this issue. I would assume that with better paper and inks less distortion (noise) would allow for a better density or dynamic as an end result.  

You are correct - they are quite seperate issues as far as the way they are generated and measured.
Logged

Lisa Nikodym

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1706
    • http://www.stanford.edu/~melkor/lisa_pictures/lisa_pictures.html
Dynamic Range & Resolution
« Reply #12 on: March 30, 2006, 10:40:45 PM »

Quote
is "in my humble opinion". Since it's the internet, it's a bit tongue in cheek.

No honesty in net talk.

DMAX is Density Maximum or a statement on the maximum darkness (black) in the print.

DR is density range, lightest light to darkest dark. You're right because matte is perceived to have trouble with really dark blacks (Dmax), glossy is concidered to have wider range. Some of the latest inks are closing the gap.

Man, I'm not getting anything quite right today!  Must be the jet lag (just got back from Japan a couple of days ago, and the brain isn't quite back to normal yet).  

You're right.  I was confusing Dmax with dynamic range.  Related concepts, but not quite the same.

Lisa
Pages: [1]   Go Up