I may have been overstating the case.  I'll try your suggestion as
well.  But, after fooling with the histogram function, I managed to
get the image to a point that approximated how my eye saw it.

http://usera.imagecave.com/rander3127/graffiti.jpg

"32-bit High Dynamic Range (HDR)—Step into the future, with the creation and
editing of 32-bit color, High Dynamic Range (HDR) images, ideal for 3D
rendering, advanced compositing and professional photography. With advanced
technology that adapts to the full spectrum and range of visible light in
the same way as the human eye, HDR ensures your final images will display
your creative vision to the last detail, with the most richly detailed
shadows and highlights at your command. Let the new Merge to HDR take you
beyond the state-of-the-art, by automatically combining bracketed digital
exposures into a single 32-bit HDR image, creating breathtaking images that
are otherwise impossible to capture with traditional cameras."

Well, slightly. You can to some extent control the contrast ratio of
film by controlling development time (or first dev time for colour
film). Works well for B&W film, works to a lesser extent for E6
(reversal) film, is barely possible with C41 (negative) film as the
process is usually so rigidly automated.

It would sometimes be nice to have sensors with variable contrast,
though to be fair they do start out with a higher range than most films,
and the techniques already mentioned serve instead.

David

Exactly.  And in terms of not only exposure, but also resolution.  Your
eye/brain has got a *lot* less in common with a camera than most folk
think.  Go back to that graffiti site, and stare fixedly at one part of
the scene.  While you remain staring fixedly at that point, can you
actually read something, or truly see *new* detail, in the other
brighter/darker areas outside those couple of degrees that are in sharp
focus and correctly 'exposed'?  Try it right now, focus on this little
dot:

.

Can you genuinely read anything 3 lines above or below?  Can you
*really* see detail in bright or dark areas in the rest of your field
of view?  The rest of your view is of much lower resolution, and while
your eye is adjusted for an area of one brightness it cannot adjust for
other areas.  So the *brain* takes over and fills in memorised or
'fake' detail, or increases/reduces your perceived 'exposure' of the
other areas outside that narrow tunnel.  It is only when your eye
moves, and then the pupil dilates/shrinks, that it can cope with the
dynamic range of the scene.  In other words... it cheats!

The camera, of course, has to try to capture everything in the scene
all at once (so that your eye can wander over the final image and cheat
again!).  So IMO, the eye isn't so much 'better', it's just
*completely* different..

How do you know he shoots Nikon and not Canon?

<G>

Instead of compositing in Photoshop, you might be able to pull out the
shadow contrast with some simple Levels adjustment.

Thanks!  I see how it works.
-Rich