How does Better Light calculate MP count?

[jkuska]

Just curious Jim, how would you rank your BL back compared to a first class drum scanned 4x5 and your Leaf back (it is leaf right?)

Hi Kirk... Jim

Did you check out the links I've provided to Richard Kenwards site, Artisan-Digital-Services, in England? He post clear comparisons of BL scans and scanned film here:
http://www.artisan-digital-services....capture-3.html
and I was wondering what you (and Jim) thought of them?
Richard has his own drum scanner as some of his clients still like film, though I believe he shoots both now in those situations. Sometimes it is easier to just hold a sheet of film up to the light to see what you're talking about.

[Kirk Gittings]

Hi Kirk... Jim

Did you check out the links I've provided to Richard Kenwards site, Artisan-Digital-Services, in England? He post clear comparisons of BL scans and scanned film here:
http://www.artisan-digital-services....capture-3.html
and I was wondering what you (and Jim) thought of them?
Richard has his own drum scanner as some of his clients still like film, though I believe he shoots both now in those situations. Sometimes it is easier to just hold a sheet of film up to the light to see what you're talking about.

I have not, but I will. I asked Jim simply because I know him and his broad experience, and greatly value his opinion.

[Mike1234]

I'd really like a large digital capture device but they're just too pricey for me... hence my decision to go with big film.

[Nathan Potter]

the 4x5 film and the back is pretty close to a wash in my experience. You get a little more 'area' captured with the film, but you get a 'cleaner' image with the Betterlight. You can drum scan the film to a greater degree.. but in most cases, you're not capturing any more real data than with the Betterlight. Most lenses don't resolve more than the Betterlight captures using 'field' apertures. I'll still shoot film, but it's more for the look of a specific emulsion, rather than for added detail. I do like the immediate feedback of a finished image from the Betterlight. I can leave a site knowing that everything is 'right'

There are conditions where the Betterlight doesn't fare as well in the field.. Windy is the most obvious. It's not the wind blowing the subject, as much as the wind blowing the camera that's the issue.

The Leaf back is definitely more convenient than either the Betterlight or film. I use a Horseman SWD with it, so if necessary I can do a 9 shot stitch (the back moves, so there's no issue at all with parallax). The SWD can be used with a 35mm digital lens, and stopped down, covers the full stitched area well.... giving me a huge wide angle lens (great for interiors).

i find if i'm going to be shooting an older lens, wide open (Veritos, Cooke, Petzval).. then i'll use the Betterlight. Normal landscape, then it's a tossup as far as the mood i'm in. For architecture work, I have strobes, so for the cases where i need lighting, then I use the Leaf.

The only time I'll use film now, is if I want the look/feel of Tri-x and Pyro (using it either with 4x5 or 6x6 ).

From a customer perspective... I've had my Betterlight since 2001... and have dealt with the company since then. Betterlight has by far, the best support (technical and customer) than *any* other company I've ever dealt with.

Jim, the practical "field aperture" that you mention above was the point in my original message. That is, the lens really is the limit in capturing detail for both film and scanning backs so I would guess that as you state, and Kirk asked, there should not be much noticeable difference between a scanned high quality image and a high quality scanning digital back as far as detail captured is concerned. Given, of course the best quality image capture in both cases.

In large format, practical apertures will generally be f/16 or smaller so in all cases film grains or pixels will be sampling defocused circles of confusion. Of course the rendering of defocused COCs will have suttle differences between film and scanning back. The mathematics of digitizing overlapping COCs is quite complicated and interesting but the visual results are what interest most of us.

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

[jkuska]

I'd really like a large digital capture device but they're just too pricey for me... hence my decision to go with big film.

You may have to start coating your own emulsions sometime here in the next decade after all silver halide based photography is relegated to the historical processes. At least we will still have Bostick & Sullivan and Photographers Formulary to fall back on for the foreseeable future.

You could shop eBay where you can often get a good value on high end digital for under $6K (typically BL but others as well). As Jim so kindly alludes to it doesn't matter where you buy a system, new or used, you will receive the same excellent support and service that every customer does. BL produces a very high end premium product that's built like a tank and it is the most upstanding and moral company I have ever worked for (and I'm 62).

[jkuska]

Jim, the practical "field aperture" that you mention above was the point in my original message. That is, the lens really is the limit in capturing detail for both film and scanning backs so I would guess that as you state, and Kirk asked, there should not be much noticeable difference between a scanned high quality image and a high quality scanning digital back as far as detail captured is concerned. Given, of course the best quality image capture in both cases.

In large format, practical apertures will generally be f/16 or smaller so in all cases film grains or pixels will be sampling defocused circles of confusion. Of course the rendering of defocused COCs will have suttle differences between film and scanning back. The mathematics of digitizing overlapping COCs is quite complicated and interesting but the visual results are what interest most of us.

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

hmmm... while Ektachrome has a Dmax of about 4.0, implying about a 12 stop range, only about 6 of those stops are printable with detail. BL has an 11+ stop dynamic range with the better part (if not all) of it being printable with detail. Of course different tone curves can alter this but the boss, for example, shoots all of his landscapes with a 10 stop "S" Curve that's very gentle and captures everything.

[Mike1234]

You may have to start coating your own emulsions sometime here in the next decade after all silver halide based photography is relegated to the historical processes. At least we will still have Bostick & Sullivan and Photographers Formulary to fall back on for the foreseeable future.

You could shop eBay where you can often get a good value on high end digital for under $6K (typically BL but others as well). As Jim so kindly alludes to it doesn't matter where you buy a system, new or used, you will receive the same excellent support and service that every customer does. BL produces a very high end premium product that's built like a tank and it is the most upstanding and moral company I have ever worked for (and I'm 62).

I can buy a BL system for $6K? Hmm... I wonder what it would cost to have an adapter/slider back made for a 5x12 Korona.

[Aahx]

Well for me at least the price is not my only consideration for not purchasing a scan back. But the wieght...not just of the scanner, but the laptop and cables as well. I use quickloads for that very reason to reduce wieght on my trips further afield. If I had to bring a laptop as well, i would have too drop a lens or two from my kit to make up for the added wieght/bulk. So a perfect solution for me would be a lightwieght large format back that was stand alone. This way I could also potentialy carry a "back up" one in case one went down in the inclement conditions here in Alaska. Untill such a device is invented, film will still be my prefered solution of choice.

[jkuska]

I have not, but I will. I asked Jim simply because I know him and his broad experience, and greatly value his opinion.

By the way Kirk... Jim and I met back in the late 80's when I had my own Carbon Lab in Santa Cruz (Limited Edition - Photo/Graphics: he walked in hoping to find a Dye Transfer lab but liked the Carbon process even better). I taught him everything he knows about photography. ;-)

I received my BFA in Photo from the Los Angeles Art Center, College of Design when it was still in Highland Park back in '76 and then worked for some of the big boys in town (like Carl Furuta, Jeff Nadler & Bill Robins); and a couple of great labs as well (like Hecht Custom Photographics); as well as making Ted Staidles acquaintance and picking his brain (a premier Cibachrome printer and masking/imposition artist/technician); all in Hollywood before moving up North to Santa Cruz and the Bay area and starting the Carbon project.

[jkuska]

I can buy a BL system for $6K? Hmm... I wonder what it would cost to have an adapter/slider back made for a 5x12 Korona.

well, the adapter may be pushing it but geez, have you seen all the good deals on 4x5 equipment, cameras and lens on eBay? I picked up two Cambo Legends for $250 plus shipping and an APO Sinronar S 180 for $450.