Thoughts on dynamic range


Wikipedia defines dynamic range as: “an important indicator of the quality of a system intended either to record or to reproduce information for human perception.”  Therefore, “high” dynamic range = high quality. At least in terms of reproducing information intended to be seen/heard/read/perceived by people.

Which got me to thinking about why HDR imaging is so revolutionary.  You see, it shows you what I saw when I was there.  Nothing less.  It’s as close to viewing static 3D images as you can get and may be even better because you don’t have to wear those stupid paper “glasses” or get motion sickness looking at them, like I do. (Sure, sometimes HDR isn’t needed and in fact, sometimes makes a scene worse.  LDR photography is just fine for lots of things.)

But the real value of the above definition resonated with me through my continuing push to be a better writer.  As a writer, am I not concerned with quality when I reproduce information for human perception?  Is there anything else to it? Aside from the usual periphery of avoiding errors and making sense, writers work hard to make reading easy.  At least the good ones do.

 (And in my quest to never publish a photo-free post, the above image is in honor of St. Patrick’s Day.  Thanks to Cameron for the modeling job.)


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s