How dynamic range compares on film vs digital

John Aldred

John Aldred is a photographer with over 25 years of experience in the portrait and commercial worlds. He is based in Scotland and has been an early adopter – and occasional beta tester – of almost every digital imaging technology in that time. As well as his creative visual work, John uses 3D printing, electronics and programming to create his own photography and filmmaking tools and consults for a number of brands across the industry.

YouTube video

The film vs digital argument has been going on since DSLRs first hit the market a couple of decades ago. But it doesn’t seem to be dying any time soon, especially with films popularity growing again. One of the big debates between the two formats that regularly pops up is that of dynamic range.

So, photographer Bill Lawson put it to the test. He shot some Kodak T-Max 100 in a Nikon N90s vs the more recent Nikon D750 DSLR using the Nikon 135mm f/2 AF-D DC lens on both to see how they compare.

There are a few things to bear in mind with this test. Bill is shooting black and white negative film in this test, which typically has the highest latitude amongst film, particularly for overexposure. Had he used colour negative film or slide film, the results would probably be somewhat different. It was also developed in Kodak D-76 developer. Again, the results might be different had he used something else, like Ilfotech DD-X. It’s also as much a test of the scanner used as it is the film itself.

Bill shot 21 images with each camera. A correctly exposed shot, then ten images underexposed and ten images overexposed, each one stop apart. And the results are interesting, but not unexpected – especially for those who’ve shot negative film before.

The Kodak TMAX film offered the higher dynamic range overall, with around 13 stops of acceptable (to Bill) exposure latitude. Everything from 2 stops underexposed to a crazy 10 stops overexposed worked quite well. With digital, it was slightly less at around 9 stops, with 6 stops underexposed to 2 stops overexposed looking good.

As the results indicate, and as the word “negative” implies, digital and negative film work in opposite ways. With film, overexposing the shot results in very little degradation of the image, even in the highlights, while underexposing will kill shadow detail very quickly. With digital, it’s the other way around. Underexposing offers a minimal amount of degradation for a few stops while overexposing loses detail almost immediately.

So, in short, and speaking generally, with digital, shoot to record maximum highlight detail (underexpose if needed), and then recover the shadows in post. With negative film, shoot to record maximum shadow detail (overexpose if needed) and develop for the highlights in post.

Filed Under:

Tagged With:

Find this interesting? Share it with your friends!

John Aldred

John Aldred

John Aldred is a photographer with over 25 years of experience in the portrait and commercial worlds. He is based in Scotland and has been an early adopter – and occasional beta tester – of almost every digital imaging technology in that time. As well as his creative visual work, John uses 3D printing, electronics and programming to create his own photography and filmmaking tools and consults for a number of brands across the industry.

Join the Discussion

DIYP Comment Policy
Be nice, be on-topic, no personal information or flames.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

4 responses to “How dynamic range compares on film vs digital”

  1. bjarnewinkler Avatar
    bjarnewinkler

    So the question I have is since the film recovery is better on over exposed images, where as digital is better at the under exposed. Is this due to that the film is really a negative scan?

    1. Rob Avatar
      Rob

      It has to do with film having a non-linear exposure response as exposure goes more toward over exposure. After a certain point, it takes more than a one stop increase in light to produce a one stop increase in density on a negative. The more the exposure goes into over exposed territory, the more light is needed to gain an extra step of density. As John pointed out, the test is limited by the film scanner’s ability to detect the changes in film density.

      1. bjarnewinkler Avatar
        bjarnewinkler

        Thanks Rob

  2. Bill Stewart Avatar
    Bill Stewart

    Good article that does point out differences that people have shot film will relate too. Although, more people were likely shooting negatives than slides in the past, another and possibly better comparison may have been digital vs slides? Exposures seem to affect them in a similar way. Back when I was still shooting film I often used a bit of underexposure as a method to increase color saturation with slide film. I’ve found that digital works in a similar fashion.