What film has the best dynamic range? I've just bought an

>>3084843
Well exposed film will give you a large dynamic range, better than most of the digital camera
So I'd say any film

>>3084843
Portra 400 has great dynamic range.

>>3084847
As long as it's better than digi it'd be worth it
>>3084848
Alright cheers, I'll have to try that

>>3084906
Hehe it wont be hard
>>3084848
I'm de acuerdo with you, Portra is my favorite emulsion.

Digital is actually better than most film at this point, just at the opposite end of the scale.

Where film does amazingly well with highlights, it crushes shadows and looks like shit. Where digital clips highlights, it does amazingly well with shadows.

Also, the highest dynamic range isn't due to the film, but the developer. There are some low contrast-high DR developers that can pull out 19 or 20 usable stops of dynamic range.

>>3084970
Thank for the knowledge

>>3084843

I took this. Used Portra 160 overexposed at 80, meter for the shadows.

>>3084843
Kodak Portra 400, or (personally) Fujifilm Natura 800.

>>3084972
Pretty good pull anon

>>3084998
hey thanks

although not technically a pull because I had the lab develop for 160 and not 80, therefor overexposing.

File: Bild009_Neg.Nr.8A.jpg (369KB, 667x1000px) Image search: [Google]

369KB, 667x1000px

Another vote for Portra 400. Always performs well.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi

File: untitled.jpg (625KB, 2001x657px) Image search: [Google]

625KB, 2001x657px

>>3084972
>>3084998
>>3085011
>>3084843
For color, it's Portra 160/400, as far as I know.
pic related is portra 160 @ 100

B&W I don't know. N-4 developed Tri-x or 2-bath-developed with high and low concentration of developer?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

File: 02310037.jpg (5MB, 3130x2075px) Image search: [Google]

5MB, 3130x2075px

soooo , how percentage do you guys think what determine the dynamic range?

50% film : 50% developer or else?

*mistakenly metering by over 5 1/2 stop, the negative come out really dark (agfa vista 400)

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	QSS-32_33
Camera Software	QSS-32_33 10.00.020 2009.12.21
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3130
Image Height	2075

>>3084843
Kodak Kodachrome

File: 06.jpg (481KB, 900x1103px) Image search: [Google]

481KB, 900x1103px

>>3085426
This is not true. Kodachrome had some of the worst dynamic range of any film.

Pic related

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS3 Windows
Photographer	Shorpy.com
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	1800 dpi
Vertical Resolution	1800 dpi
Image Created	2011-04-17T11:56:12+04:00
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	900
Image Height	1103

>>3085478
>post perfect picture with stunning colors
>boyz kodachrome was so bad!
get new eyes, faggot.

File: anbmeO5_700b.jpg (55KB, 634x440px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 634x440px

>>3085481
Kodachrome is well known for its limited dynamic range. Hence this exemple is underexposed and lit by a flash in daylight. Notice how the shadows are crushed blacks?

>>3085514

dis guy is right but he's also just proving the dynamic range meme needs to end

>>3085514
>hurzzz why hard shadowz under heavy mid day sun?
dont be such a mongoloid.

>>3085555

>not being digisheep and having everything be the same mushy gray yellow brown