Jeff Schewe wrote:
> Film sucked when compared to the resolution, accurate color and more > accurate ISO, no grain (and very little noise) of digital capture from the > 1Ds. Side by side, head to head, film sucked. different combinations of subject matter, lighting conditions etc conspire sometimes to make a low rez low fidelity look as good as a high rez high fidelity version ...just as sometimes the difference is hugely apparent anyone who has a lot of experience shooting 10/8 landscape is aware that there are lighting conditions and scenes which 'look really good' *only* when recorded with such levels of visual fidelity and there are others which appear sharp and, and, and, - and are 'amazing' regardless what format process or post process is used. This is often more apparent when considering black and white over color (different parts of the brain respond to sculptural cues - and color often takes priority over this in basic recognition) when it comes to digital vs film, doubtless there are scenes where the gradual deterioration of an image (as per analogue) provides just the right feeling and there are others where the lack of this means absolutely nothing. Then again - there may be ocasions when the lack of a suggestion that there may be anything below the level of clear detail provides the viewer with a warm 'life is so good to me - there is absolutely 'nothing' I am missing out on' feeling. This is popular in advertising. Not many of us take the trouble to question the fundamental basis of our photo sensibilities. We produce images which have been tweaked to produce the maximum recogntion but that is merely within a standard formula - namely that skin tones are in a range of bla bla bla, that clarity is defined by key lighting and contrast within a certain range. We are educated to regard reproductive fidelity in an extremely trite stereotyped manner. Our physical and psychological visual relationship to reality is far removed from what we produce in photographic media - it is only when one goes off the beaten track to experiment with, and push the limits of what is considered visually interesting, does one realize how arbitrary our value parameters are. As far as I am aware - w/r to analogue vs digital sound - there were experiments which showed that the presence of sound outside the auditory hearing range enhanced recognition in the listening experience. One of these was where people in an anechoic chamber were presented with a very low level sounds and their ability to resolve those sounds was dramatically enhanced when other very high frequency sounds (30k+ - well above the audible threshold) were present. What 'I' like about digital (at least in theory) is that we now have so many controls - and we are presently expected to exercise 'all' this new armory to enhance images. Our serious lack of visual training and imaginations are far more apparent than before - - formerly we could hike a free ride on some analogue formula process that 'always gives pleasing results' (bugger the reason why, screw the viewer, give us your money). This all fails of course in practice, because the most of us are never happier to rally around some crummy formula 'look' to disguise our lack of expertise and hope that everyone else is pushed out of business. ...and - scientific tools serve only too often as another bluff, to compensate for a personal/professional lack of visual intelligence/discrimination. Although the vacuum of choice presented by digital is being filled with hardly anything but 'look alike analogue treatments' and a new dreary conservatism has already taken over, we have yet to make the most of our new digital tools. Commercial operations seek high levels color fidelity, mostly driven by defensive needs (ie abvoiding being sued for bad results) but the lack of complacency in this sector offers the artist marvelous opportunities to extend sensitivity and train the mind......not that that matters to anyone. Funny - photographic fidelity is not worth a fig and yet we all run around worrying about it. philip =============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
