The aim here is to show the aesthetic differences between the two approaches to image capture and what this means for the image's final appeal to the end viewer.

These images were taken during a week's evaluation/demo at Plus 8 Digital, in LA, where we had Thomson's Viper and Sony's F950 Digital Film Cameras linked directly to Quantel's iQ capturing the images in fully uncompressed RGB 4:4:4 form.

There is a lot of discussion bandwidth given over to 'film' vs. 'digital' capture, and how aesthetically the end results compare, with many describing film as having a preferable final image quality. Often this is described to being a factor of film's grain giving an image an organic feel, lacking in digital imagery. From evaluations perform by Light Illusion we have concluded that this is not the case, and that as outlined elsewhere within this website it is the propensity for linear digital cameras to clip shadow detail and crush highlights that makes 'digital' seem inferior to 'film'. However, this need not be the case if the digital camera is set to capture a low contrast, high dynamic range image, mimicking the capture properties of 'film'. See the technical paper 'Digital film: Screen-to-Scene, a user's guide' for more information on camera setup.

Allowing or the fact the images are compressed jpgs here, for obvious reasons, it is the lack of shadow detail (and highlight - but its harder to see that with these compressed web images) that is the obvious difference. Look at the sold blacks behind the guitar in the first image and compare that to the original log captured one and again with print LUTs applied. This is the biggest difference between the majority of 'digitally captured images and traditional film capture.

Click each image for a lager version.

This first image shows a standard linear capture approach with grading being performed 'in-camera' in an attempt to generate an immediately usable image. The problems can be seen in the shadow and highlight detail - or lack there of (you may need to up the brightness of your monitor to see the lack of shadow detail easily, and look at the larger image by clicking this small one).

Original linear capture

This second image shows an ideal log (or low contrast linear) image as captured on-set. Note all available detail is held within the extended dynamic range. Also note that this is exactly as the image will appear during cinematography, requiring an understanding from DoP and Director as to what the final image is capable of becoming. This is the key to maximising the grading process of DI, just as has been the case with traditional 'film' capture for years, i.e. the lab grading process.

Original log capture

And this final image is the same log image with grading (Print) LUTs applied. Look again at the shadow and highlight detail you will see there is still detail visible, unlike the linear captured image.

For more in-depth information please review the 'Technical Papers' within the links above.