4 ms·

No amount of computational smartphone photography can match, in my eyes, the clarity and contrast and intensity of whatever analogue medium these were captured

No amount of computational smartphone photography can match, in my eyes, the clarity and contrast and intensity of whatever analogue medium these were captured on. This looks gorgeous. I'm extremely tempted to splurge on this, and the Apollo, books...

lm28469 1y ago
Medium format film (120, 6x6), Hasselblad cameras. I personally think we're barely starting to match the quality of medium format film with modern medium format sensors https://airandspace.si.edu/collection-objects/camera-hasselblad-70mm-gemini/nasm_A19770556000 https://airandspace.si.edu/collection-objects/camera-hasselb...
- tecleandor 1y ago
  Film in big formats is incredible, gives great images even on shitty cameras...
  - kjkjadksj 1y ago
    These hasselblads not shitty cameras. A holga is on the other hand, and the images are shitty as a result despite being medium format.
    - tecleandor 1y ago
      Wasn't talking about those cameras umin particular, but about bigger format film in general. Even on shittier cameras, like a Holga 120 leaking everywhere with a plastic lens, the results with medium format film is always surprising and gives you a lot of leeway.
- bbatha 1y ago
  Depends on how you define quality. While medium and large format photography are extremely high resolution that’s not the only factor. Space age lenses were significantly lower resolution than the film. Modern mirrorless lenses are starting to come close to being able to out resolve film but still aren’t there. Meaning that you get more functional resolution out of modern digital. Digital also beats the pants off film for dynamic range and low light. That said the noise (grain) and dynamic range fall off in film are more pleasing than digital to most eyes. So it’s not all about technical specs.
  - thw_9a83c 1y ago
    > Digital also beats the pants off film for dynamic range and low light. While this is true now, it took a surprisingly long time to get there. The dynamic range of professional medium format negative films is still respectable. Perhaps not so much in a low light, but it's very immune to overexposure. Also, you can buy a cheap medium-format camera in a good condition and experience that "huge sensor" effect, but unfortunately there are no inexpensive 6x6 digital cameras.
    - buildbot 1y ago
      In fact there is basically only one digital back ever made at that size, the dicomed bigshot.
      - thw_9a83c 1y ago
        Interesting. I didn't even know that. I had to look up what's the size of the modern Hasselblad digital camera sensor, and it 43.8 × 32.9mm.
        buildbot 1y ago
        It’s incredibly rare and specific, many people in the DB world don’t even know about them. 60x60mm sensor, larger than the actual film gate of 56x56mm There was also a version for the Rollei 6x6 6000 series, the Rollei Q16. I’ve only seen one for sale ever. Technically larger than 6x6 film sensors have existed since the 80s or 90s at least but are typically only used for government things… Some digital aerial systems use huge sensors.
  - bhickey 1y ago
    > Space age lenses were significantly lower resolution than the film. Can you say a little more about this? Modern lenses boast about 7-elements or aspherics, but does that actually matter in prime lenses? You can get an achromat with two lenses and an apochromat with three. There have definitely been some advances in glass since the space program, like fluorite versus BK7, but I'm wholly in the dark on the nuances.
- kjkjadksj 1y ago
  Even the fuji medium formats don’t have sensors as large. They are more like 4cm x 3cm.
glimshe 1y ago
Great lenses with huge film frames. It's doable in digital, but not on a Smartphone or budget SLR.
londons_explore 1y ago
Computational photography is about to get really good when it can combine hundreds or thousands of frames into one. 1000 frames effectively combined is equivalent to a lens and sensor of 1000x the surface area - ie exceeding a single frame from a DSLR. Current methods use optical flow and gyroscopes to align images, but I imagine future methods to use AI to understand movement that doesn't work well for optical flow (ie. Where a specular reflection 'moves' on a wine glass).
- dmitrygr 1y ago
  Saying “ai” does not magically solve anything. Current best ML things can’t even solve medium difficulty calculus equations. We’re nowhere near them doing original work like understanding what’s in 1000 images, creating a world model out of that, and then rendering a better image of that world successfully without hallucinations.
- astrange 1y ago
  I doubt there's enough information in more than ~4 samples to be worth fusing into one image. Maybe more if you have a full HDR display and supply chain or if the lighting is really bad, but almost everything is about having good taste in SDR tone mapping/image development otherwise.
speed_spread 1y ago
I assume you've watched with delight the 2019 Apollo 11 documentary assembled from previously unused 70mm footage.
jillesvangurp 1y ago
You are talking about the digital, heavily processed photos here that are indeed a lot nicer than the originals taken and.printed 50 years ago. The originals were actually a bit under/over exposed (very harsh light in space), and quite grainy.
- isoprophlex 1y ago
  I get your point, but no amount of post processing gives my iphone 17 pro portraits the sharpness and atmosphere of what i shoot with my crappy nikon with a prime lens. And I feel that these old analogue photos contain even more magic in the base material, digital reconstruction notwithstanding
  - astrange 1y ago
    Those are medium format images. Rent a Fujifilm GFX100 if you want to try something like that. Storage space for the raws adds up though.
LiquidPolymer 1y ago
I have the "Apollo Remastered" book and it is gorgeous. I'm going to buy this one too. Obviously they went back to the original film from the missions and did a full scan. NASA almost never gives access to the original film and instead we have been seeing duplicate transparencies which involves a loss of detail and dynamic range. They were good enough back then. But these first generation scans cannot be matched for detail and color.
- isoprophlex 1y ago
  I couldn't help myself and purchased both, ha. Very excited about this..!

lm28469 1y ago

Medium format film (120, 6x6), Hasselblad cameras. I personally think we're barely starting to match the quality of medium format film with modern medium format sensors https://airandspace.si.edu/collection-objects/camera-hasselblad-70mm-gemini/nasm_A19770556000 https://airandspace.si.edu/collection-objects/camera-hasselb...

tecleandor 1y ago
Film in big formats is incredible, gives great images even on shitty cameras...
- kjkjadksj 1y ago
  These hasselblads not shitty cameras. A holga is on the other hand, and the images are shitty as a result despite being medium format.
  - tecleandor 1y ago
    Wasn't talking about those cameras umin particular, but about bigger format film in general. Even on shittier cameras, like a Holga 120 leaking everywhere with a plastic lens, the results with medium format film is always surprising and gives you a lot of leeway.
bbatha 1y ago
Depends on how you define quality. While medium and large format photography are extremely high resolution that’s not the only factor. Space age lenses were significantly lower resolution than the film. Modern mirrorless lenses are starting to come close to being able to out resolve film but still aren’t there. Meaning that you get more functional resolution out of modern digital. Digital also beats the pants off film for dynamic range and low light. That said the noise (grain) and dynamic range fall off in film are more pleasing than digital to most eyes. So it’s not all about technical specs.
- thw_9a83c 1y ago
  > Digital also beats the pants off film for dynamic range and low light. While this is true now, it took a surprisingly long time to get there. The dynamic range of professional medium format negative films is still respectable. Perhaps not so much in a low light, but it's very immune to overexposure. Also, you can buy a cheap medium-format camera in a good condition and experience that "huge sensor" effect, but unfortunately there are no inexpensive 6x6 digital cameras.
  - buildbot 1y ago
    In fact there is basically only one digital back ever made at that size, the dicomed bigshot.
    - thw_9a83c 1y ago
      Interesting. I didn't even know that. I had to look up what's the size of the modern Hasselblad digital camera sensor, and it 43.8 × 32.9mm.
      - buildbot 1y ago
        It’s incredibly rare and specific, many people in the DB world don’t even know about them. 60x60mm sensor, larger than the actual film gate of 56x56mm There was also a version for the Rollei 6x6 6000 series, the Rollei Q16. I’ve only seen one for sale ever. Technically larger than 6x6 film sensors have existed since the 80s or 90s at least but are typically only used for government things… Some digital aerial systems use huge sensors.
- bhickey 1y ago
  > Space age lenses were significantly lower resolution than the film. Can you say a little more about this? Modern lenses boast about 7-elements or aspherics, but does that actually matter in prime lenses? You can get an achromat with two lenses and an apochromat with three. There have definitely been some advances in glass since the space program, like fluorite versus BK7, but I'm wholly in the dark on the nuances.
kjkjadksj 1y ago
Even the fuji medium formats don’t have sensors as large. They are more like 4cm x 3cm.

glimshe 1y ago

Great lenses with huge film frames. It's doable in digital, but not on a Smartphone or budget SLR.

londons_explore 1y ago

Computational photography is about to get really good when it can combine hundreds or thousands of frames into one. 1000 frames effectively combined is equivalent to a lens and sensor of 1000x the surface area - ie exceeding a single frame from a DSLR. Current methods use optical flow and gyroscopes to align images, but I imagine future methods to use AI to understand movement that doesn't work well for optical flow (ie. Where a specular reflection 'moves' on a wine glass).

dmitrygr 1y ago
Saying “ai” does not magically solve anything. Current best ML things can’t even solve medium difficulty calculus equations. We’re nowhere near them doing original work like understanding what’s in 1000 images, creating a world model out of that, and then rendering a better image of that world successfully without hallucinations.
astrange 1y ago
I doubt there's enough information in more than ~4 samples to be worth fusing into one image. Maybe more if you have a full HDR display and supply chain or if the lighting is really bad, but almost everything is about having good taste in SDR tone mapping/image development otherwise.

speed_spread 1y ago

I assume you've watched with delight the 2019 Apollo 11 documentary assembled from previously unused 70mm footage.

jillesvangurp 1y ago

You are talking about the digital, heavily processed photos here that are indeed a lot nicer than the originals taken and.printed 50 years ago. The originals were actually a bit under/over exposed (very harsh light in space), and quite grainy.

isoprophlex 1y ago
I get your point, but no amount of post processing gives my iphone 17 pro portraits the sharpness and atmosphere of what i shoot with my crappy nikon with a prime lens. And I feel that these old analogue photos contain even more magic in the base material, digital reconstruction notwithstanding
- astrange 1y ago
  Those are medium format images. Rent a Fujifilm GFX100 if you want to try something like that. Storage space for the raws adds up though.

LiquidPolymer 1y ago

I have the "Apollo Remastered" book and it is gorgeous. I'm going to buy this one too. Obviously they went back to the original film from the missions and did a full scan. NASA almost never gives access to the original film and instead we have been seeing duplicate transparencies which involves a loss of detail and dynamic range. They were good enough back then. But these first generation scans cannot be matched for detail and color.

isoprophlex 1y ago
I couldn't help myself and purchased both, ha. Very excited about this..!