sorry,引文錯誤，請忽略

Powerslide 大大

你杯，我，尊重你啦

可以和小白大戰那麼久不放棄，不過C小白還可以拿點東西出來貢獻

雖然他拿的資料嚴重戳破他自己講的東西...不知道為什麼要舉證據殺死自己

可是也算功德一件啦

反觀T神教教主，從頭吠到尾，什麼都拿不出來

正所謂，會叫的狗不會咬人，不會叫的狗會咬人 (是這樣用的嗎??)

重來，應該是，半瓶水的反而響叮噹...

沒事，這個討論串，看的很爽，請繼續

看不懂英文的人好好自己查一下字典了解一下這附圖的解說吧,
唉... 程度低到連 historgram 都不會看的人, 大概努力思考三天也許可以看懂吧.



"Figure 8a, 8b, below, show the transfer function of a digital camera (a Canon 1D Mark II) compared to print film (Kodak Gold 200), slide film (Fujichrome Velvia), and the relative response of the Human eye (note the human eye has a much greater dynamic range). What this graph shows is that the digital camera response function is similar to print film, but slightly lower in contrast in some parts of the curve, slightly higher in other parts. Fujichrome Velvia has the highest contrast of the 4 systems shown. But also of interest is the noise. Note that the digital camera points follow a nice smooth line. The Fujichrome Velvia points follow a trend with scatter of individual points several times larger than the digital camera until the signal is lost in noise (below about scene intensity = 500 DN). The print film shows the widest scatter and therefore has the highest noise. Also of interest is where each curve flattens out in the lower left corner. Note the Fujichrome Velvia slide film begins to flatten at about 3000 DN on the Scene Intensity, and really flattens out just above 1000 DN. The print film flattens out (and also becomes excessively noisy) below about 900 DN. But the digital camera keeps going to the bottom end of the data below 70 DN. Noise in the digital camera image over the "black hole" was measured at 19 DN (note: that is 1.2 camera DN, limited by the A to D conversion). The Kodak gold average signal keeps decreasing toward lower signal, but the signal becomes lost in excessive noise. This shows that the Canon 1D Mark II has a much higher dynamic range than either Fujichrome Velvia slide film and Kodak Gold 200 print film. Kodak Gold 200, in this test, showed 7 stops of information, Fujichrome Velvia 5 stops, and the Canon 1D Mark II, over 10 stops of information! Further image analysis shows at least 10.6 stops are recorded by the canon 1D Mark II camera (the full range of of detail in this image, Other testing of the noise level versus intensity shows the Canon 1D Mark II has 11.7 stops of dynamic range."

btw.. 那張圖只有黑與白而已,
其實是應該只有 1bit 而已,
原圖右下角那張有色個階的才是 2bit,
好啦, 偶知道你高中數學不好, 你已經用 Y=sin(x) 證明過了,
你說 2bit 就 2bit,
畢竟你還有只有在你的 3.0D crt 上才看的到的 "國王的新 bit".

唉.. 明明人家文章裡都說了 digital camera 勝過 film 了,
還有大白要硬凹..
沒差啦, 看的懂的人看就好了,
英文差成這樣也是可以了,
看不懂內文也好歹得看的懂結論呀!

"Conclusions

Digital cameras, like the Canon 1D Mark II, show a huge dynamic range compared to either print or slide film, at least for the films compared. Jpeg digital camera images suffer from posterization and the problem is significant for highlights and darkest portions of an image. Digital camera transfer functions, like that in the Canon 1D Mark II camera, are similar to print film. "

"Notes:

Posterization is the integer quantization of digital data. For example, 16-bit data has 65535 levels while 8-bit data has only 256 levels. In the conversion from 16-bit (or 12-bit camera) data to 8-bit, some information is lost."
==============================================
廢話，拿台只有12bit的SCANNER去掃FILM

DSLR當然贏啦

你為啥不說下列的測試方法

FILM測出的DR居然高達14 stops

http://www.path.unimelb.edu.au/~bernardk/tutorials/360/technical/hdri/evaluate.html

看不懂英文的人好好自己查一下字典了解一下這附圖的解說吧,
唉... 程度低到連 historgram 都不會看的人, 大概努力思考三天也許可以看懂吧.
======================================================
噗
又在睜眼說瞎話了
這張圖就已經解釋你前面所謂DSLR過曝的問題
其實不過是特性曲線的差異




==================================================================
偶當然知道有差別呀,
例如調圖造成的一些 spike, 已經指出,
重點是光從 historgram 的分部情況,
就可以看出來原本兩張圖的亮度就差了至少半格.
而不調圖也可以看出來兩張元圖就是一張過曝, 一張曝光不足,
================================================

唉.. 明明人家文章裡都說了 digital camera 勝過 film 了,
還有大白要硬凹..
沒差啦, 看的懂的人看就好了,
英文差成這樣也是可以了,
看不懂內文也好歹得看的懂結論呀!

"Conclusions

Digital cameras, like the Canon 1D Mark II, show a huge dynamic range compared to either print or slide film, at least for the films compared. Jpeg digital camera images suffer from posterization and the problem is significant for highlights and darkest portions of an image. Digital camera transfer functions, like that in the Canon 1D Mark II camera, are similar to print film. "

"Notes:

Posterization is the integer quantization of digital data. For example, 16-bit data has 65535 levels while 8-bit data has only 256 levels. In the conversion from 16-bit (or 12-bit camera) data to 8-bit, some information is lost."
==========================================
看來有人中文不好，連英文都有問題
at least for the films compared
are similar to print film.
可以翻譯成勝過

"噗
這是個什麼爛實驗啊
用12bits的掃描器掃瞄FILM然後去跟12bits A/D converter DSLR作比較
就算你FILM有更好的階調,，在你的12bit Scanner下根本表現不出來
這跟我下面那張圖有什麼差別"

呵呵, 字打嘴吧,
現在知道 bit number 的差別摟,
好啦, 你慢慢去多讀多研究吧...
唉, btw, 你知道 jpeg 的壓縮流程了嗎?
知道哪一個步驟是 DPCM 了嗎 ??

好啦, 既然你已經實際實驗出 bit 數, 對 DR 的影響了,
好好的學習吧,
好啦, 鼓勵你一下,
那份 2bit 的圖很不錯,
每張都有你說的 "國王的新3.0D"!
好歹你也自己 post 了張圖字打嘴巴,
下次記得 bit number 的重要性啦,
=============================================
噗
人家說什麼,你說什麼
『階調』＝『DR』？

~~~~~~~~ＸＤ

Another website has similar examples here. This guy used a crappy scanner and still got far superior results from film. Again, just think how much better the film would look scanned properly. Remember, film shot today can always be scanned better in the future. Digital is always stuck in whatever quality you had when you shot it. This is why Hollywood shoots movies and even the better TV series on fill, so that 10 or 50 years from now they can still get great images.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/filmdig.htm
======================================================
用爛的掃描器，當然得不到好的結果
要測試FILM的極限
請愛用滾筒掃瞄
不然也請用大尺寸底片來跟DSLR比較

======================================================
another test for film vs. dslr

http://www.butterflydesigns.net/tests/film_digital.htm

怎麼對D100都要抬出4x5來上駟對下駟了。對1Ds要派誰？對120數位機背要訂製16x20來對戰嗎？