Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/12/03
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]OK. To clear some things out. I shoot both digital and analog, with a big preference for analog because it makes me somewhat less just snapping away. Digital is OK, but I use it differently. However, I adore using PS and other digital technology because for me, it gives me more possibilities to get out of a shot what I imagine (d) in my head. And that has very little to do with 'technical' perfection. In other words, the main problem I have with digital is that the image quality is getting too perfect. And if everything is perfect, there is no difference any more. Pretty boring, IMO. Maybe that's a strange thing to hear, but coming for somebody who only started with photography in the 80s, it maybe is not that uncommon: I never had to crave for better quality as some of you might have back in the 50s, 60s or 70s: the quality of film back in those days was seen by some as limiting, and I understand that it must have been frustrating not being able to capture something exactly as one saw it. Hence probably the 'filtermania', postprocessing etc back then. But for me, and looking at such photographs (or printed representations) now, it was the era were photos were not necesseraly technically perfect but had a lot more character and charm. Take Ted's 'Men of the saddle' for instance: technically, these photographs are somewhat dated. But qua content and picturing quality, they still are top notch. I'd even say that the technical 'flaws' in them (color rendition and print reproduction) enhance the feeling of authenticity and quality they have. Same thing with traditional mechanical cameras (of which a pre-M7 M is the ultimate result) and lenses: not perfect, but what character! Try to copy 'le baiser de l'h?tel de ville' with modern material for instance. It's virtually impossible to get that softness and tonal rendition right out of camera with today's cameras, lenses and film. In short (and call me melancholic): I'm not looking for perfect, I'm looking for imperfect. Because that very often makes a part of the charm and personality of a photo. And, as a matter of fact, of a lot of other things in life, too. So if I stumble upon a program that lets me recreate the imperfect feel of films that do not exist any more, that makes me -as I already said yesterday- very happy. Does that mean that I'm against the digital revolution of these last years? Not at all, but I'm confronted and work with that in my professional life every day. If I were a photo pro, I'd probably sing another song. But I'm not, I'm an amateur. (Which BTW origins form the word 'aimer'). Philippe Op 3-dec-06, om 07:03 heeft Henning Wulff het volgende geschreven: >> This is a photograph that I already showed exactly as below here. >> I shot it on Fuji NPS160, with professional development, but had >> it scanned commerially on low res: all flattened out. >> >> http://tinyurl.com/y4o8pq >> or bigger: >> http://tinyurl.com/tbwgw >> >> >> >> This is the same shot after I let Alien Skin (and some minor >> additional PS alterations) have a go at the original scan today: >> >> as big as above: >> http://tinyurl.com/y373rf >> >> !!! the big ones are in Adobe RGB !!! >> >> Isn't the 2nd one much more distinctive and doesn't it have a lot >> more character? Or am I just overenthousiastic? >> >> Philippe > > Hi Philippe, > > The plug in just seems to increase contrast, throw a lot of the > extended tonal range away and skew the colours to introduce a cast. > > This is usually what I fight to get rid of when scanning. > > Film, properly printed lets me get a huge tonal range and a good > printer was always able to handle the colours properly. My scans, > even with a fairly good scanner, are usually limited in comparison > to projected slides or a good print. > > I'm sorry, but the first image, while not necessarily optimized, > allows all sorts of interpretations, but the second looks like a > poor scan. It is a 'film' look, but one that mimics something I try > to avoid - not always successfully. > > -- > * Henning J. Wulff > /|\ Wulff Photography & Design > /###\ mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com > |[ ]| http://www.archiphoto.com > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >