Christoph Hormann wrote:
> Severi Salminen wrote:
>> Actually it wouldn't. As you can see there are quite dark things 
>> (windows of nearby building?) visible outside. As the sun is most 
>> likely not hitting there (notice the angle), they should not be 
>> totally white. It is also possible to compress very wide brightness 
>> levels on a single photo - either using traditional or digital 
>> darkroom techniques. Typical Wal-Mart photos might be a different 
>> thing :) So IMHO the result is VERY good.
> 
> 
> Can you show a photograph to support this claim?

I don't know which claim do you mean (there were many) but here is one 
that shows one digital technique:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/blended_exposures.shtml

With traditional film you can record easily a 13+ stop (1:2^13) range of 
brightness levels in one negative frame and print them to look non-white 
(ie. not "blown out" which you mean). This requires just some reduction 
in film developement time (to decrease its contrast) and results lower 
middle value contrast. There are also other techniques like: "burning", 
"dodging", "pre-flashing" etc. So it is indeed not impossible at all. 
The result depends also _how_ big the contrast difference in the scene 
is. In Jaime's image the sun was shining also little to the room and 
there were lamps in the ceiling. Also the nearby building was in shade 
so the difference is not that big.

If I come up with a traditional photo that shows simultaneously a room 
from inside and something outside I'll post the link to this thread.

Regards,
Severi S.

Post a reply to this message