Perhaps you misunderstand ... That original photo IS in color.
It was an unbelievably hazy day.
Rendering RGB to monochrome I do after I get the cropping the
way i want it. It's often the largest part of my image
processing work.
Godfrey
--- Juan Buhler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 25
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 14:44:35 -0800 (PST), Godfrey DiGiorgi
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It was captured with the Panasonic FZ10 in full color ... The
> original is what you see when you click on the image, pre all
> significant processing work other than rotation and a small
> amount of cropping t
Thanks, Juan.
It was captured with the Panasonic FZ10 in full color ... The
original is what you see when you click on the image, pre all
significant processing work other than rotation and a small
amount of cropping to get the verticals where I wanted them.
When I first saw it on the computer,
On 25 Jan 2005 at 11:04, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> I like your viewpoint, and I agree with your assessment. I've
> used techniques of adding noise/grain to smooth out very fine
> tonal transitions in printing that would otherwise cause even a
> high-end printer to 'stair step' the tonal levels. So
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 11:04:36 -0800 (PST), Godfrey DiGiorgi
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This photo of the Golden Gate Bridge was made in such incredibly
> hazy conditions that in the original capture you could barely
> even make out the bridge. The down-rezzed web image doesn't do
> the A3 print j
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> ... I'm going to step back a little bit and
> touch on what grain gives an image rather than worrying about
> how it is created.
>
> To my eye, grain increases contrast at a microscopic level,
> increasing accutance and adding a "crunchy" texture to
> smooth areas.
In a message dated 1/24/2005 10:36:43 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
All,
Interesting debate. I'm going to step back a little bit and
touch on what grain gives an image rather than worrying about
how it is created.
To my eye, grain increases contrast at a microscopic leve
In a message dated 1/24/2005 10:36:43 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
All,
Interesting debate. I'm going to step back a little bit and
touch on what grain gives an image rather than worrying about
how it is created.
To my eye, grain increases contrast at a microscopic leve
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> In a message dated 1/23/2005 11:58:14 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> It is art, and if the rules were so well defined then I'd be doing
> something else.
>
> j
> ==
> Sorry, I worded what I said a bit too strongly. Didn't mean it quit
In a message dated 1/23/2005 11:58:14 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It is art, and if the rules were so well defined then I'd be doing
something else.
j
==
Sorry, I worded what I said a bit too strongly. Didn't mean it quite the way
it came out. Thanks for sharing y
it makes digital images look like film. sometimes i add digital grain to
mask editing artifacts. not often though. i shoot digital because i don't
want film grain.
Herb...
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Sunday, January 23, 2005 11:12 AM
Subject: PP: Digital Gr
Water YUCK! :)
Tom C.
.
LOL!!!
ERNR
(language purist, water-drinker)
Yes, but I believe you can order them with sequins...
Cotty wrote:
Are pronouns black?
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
--
I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war.
During a war you ge
Because he though he was writing to a photography mailing list, and did not know
he was writting an essay that was going to be graded on grammar rather than content?
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---
Jon Glass wrote:
On De
Wednesday, December 8, 2004, 5:41:48 PM, Graywolf wrote:
G> No, no, a purist drinks his coffee black, or maybe with a we dram o' wiskey
in
G> it. Milk, cream, sugar, those are for infants. GRIN
"Coffee should be black as hell; strong as death, and sweet as love"
(attrib.: turkish?)
Good light!
>
> From: Bob W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 2004/12/09 Thu AM 12:22:33 GMT
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Digital grain (was Re: PESO My type of photographer)
>
> Hi,
>
> > Examples:
>
> >> proper non-gender specific pronoun
>
Are pronouns black?
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
On 9/12/04, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed:
>Usually you can rewrite it, and often improve it, by
>addressing the reader as 'you', or by putting the whole thing into the
>plural.
>
>Examples:
>
>> proper non-gender specific pronoun
>
>Purists always hyphenate correctly. If you're a purist you a
On Dec 8, 2004, at 11:36 PM, Jon Glass wrote:
I thought a purist drank "his" coffee black. (A purist also uses the
proper non-gender specific pronoun in English as well).
Actually, that was the joke... but as I understand English, a purist
would stick to the historical understanding of the Engl
Academic writing can sound unnatural out of context. But it's accurate, and
that can be important in some cases. Mating a plural pronoun with a singular
antecedent is never appropriate or accurate, and it's not a good solution to
gender sensitivity. Gender in English pronouns really has nothing
Yes, it makes you sound like you think the queen should have a seat in
parliment. Even the queen herself does not believe that anymore.
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---
Bob W wrote:
As usual it's a question of register an
In historic English "his" is the non-gender specific useage in this case...
Jon Glass wrote:
On Dec 8, 2004, at 6:56 PM, Peter J. Alling wrote:
I thought a purist drank "his" coffee black. (A purist also uses the
proper non-gender specific pronoun in English as well).
Actually, that was the joke
Hi,
Thursday, December 9, 2004, 12:33:42 AM, Paul wrote:
> I'm surprised that the Brits are more willing to bend the rules of
> grammar than are the Americans in regard to use of the plural pronoun
> "their" with a singular antecedent. I would guess that this is only
> true of informal communic
I'm surprised that the Brits are more willing to bend the rules of
grammar than are the Americans in regard to use of the plural pronoun
"their" with a singular antecedent. I would guess that this is only
true of informal communication. I wouldn't be surprised if the London
Times subscribes to
Hi,
> Examples:
>> proper non-gender specific pronoun
> Purists always hyphenate correctly. If you're a purist you always
> hyphenate correctly.
Damn! I just re-read that and I was so caught up in my own smart-arsiness
that my example didn't address the original problem.
A purist re-reads befo
Hi,
>>> I thought a purist drank "his" coffee black. (A purist also uses the
>>> proper non-gender specific pronoun in English as well).
>>>
>>>
> Very true. Even the New York Times, that bastion of American
> liberalism, uses the third person masculine pronoun when the gender is
> non-specific.
On Dec 8, 2004, at 5:36 PM, Jon Glass wrote:
I thought a purist drank "his" coffee black. (A purist also uses the
proper non-gender specific pronoun in English as well).
Very true. Even the New York Times, that bastion of American
liberalism, uses the third person masculine pronoun when the g
On Dec 8, 2004, at 6:56 PM, Peter J. Alling wrote:
I thought a purist drank "his" coffee black. (A purist also uses the
proper non-gender specific pronoun in English as well).
Actually, that was the joke... but as I understand English, a purist
would stick to the historical understanding of the
On 8/12/04, Shel Belinkoff, discombobulated, unleashed:
>No, you're a puerile digitalist
yeah, I'll go along with that.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
No, you're a puerile digitalist
Shel
> [Original Message]
> From: Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I'm a digital purist.
On 7/12/04, frank theriault, discombobulated, unleashed:
>2) Who, on this list, is a purist - come to think of it, what's a
>purist?
I'm a digital purist.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 04:51:19 -0800, Shel Belinkoff
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Juan ...
>
> I'm not sure if I'm a "purist" but I don't care for anything fake.
I make my living by making "fake" images. I suppose my skin is thicker
in this regard because of that. I wouldn't do things like del
Quoting "Peter J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Jon Glass wrote:
>
> > > A purist is a person who drinks their coffee with only cream and
> > sugar. ;-D
>
> I thought a purist drank "his" coffee black. (A purist also uses the
> proper non-gender specific pronoun in English as well).
LOL!!!
Quoting "Peter J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> If I want grain I shoot Tri-X.
Hypothetically, if I were to *want* grain, I'd probably shoot TMZ.
I can't, personally, think of a case in which I'd want grain. I see its
presence in certain images as a necessary tradeoff for getting the images at
Jon Glass wrote:
On Dec 8, 2004, at 4:04 AM, frank theriault wrote:
2) Who, on this list, is a purist - come to think of it, what's a
purist?
A purist is a person who drinks their coffee with only cream and
sugar. ;-D
I thought a purist drank "his" coffee black. (A purist also uses the
proper
If I want grain I shoot Tri-X.
Juan Buhler wrote:
On Tue, 7 Dec 2004 18:38:26 -0800, Shel Belinkoff
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Fine work, Rob. Good to see what can be done with B&W conversions and the
RAW format. Between you and Juan, I may be moving closer to a DSLR all the
faster. I do miss
No, no, a purist drinks his coffee black, or maybe with a we dram o' wiskey in
it. Milk, cream, sugar, those are for infants. GRIN
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
---
Jon Glass wrote:
On Dec 8, 2004, at 4:04 AM, frank theria
esday, December 08, 2004 7:51 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Digital grain (was Re: PESO My type of photographer)
Hi Juan ...
I'm not sure if I'm a "purist" but I don't care for anything fake. For
years we've worked with grain in film, trying to reduce or eliminat
Hi Juan ...
I'm not sure if I'm a "purist" but I don't care for anything fake. For
years we've worked with grain in film, trying to reduce or eliminate it as
much as possible, or, at times, trying to enhance it, all for creative
reasons. Now we have digital, which has it's own type of "grain", a
frank theriault wrote:
On Tue, 7 Dec 2004 18:54:26 -0800, Juan Buhler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What do the purists in the list think about these idea of fake grain?
1) That's a loaded question (that I'll have to consider before I answer), and,
2) Who, on this list, is a purist - come to thin
On Dec 8, 2004, at 4:04 AM, frank theriault wrote:
2) Who, on this list, is a purist - come to think of it, what's a
purist?
A purist is a person who drinks their coffee with only cream and sugar.
;-D
--
-Jon Glass
Krakow, Poland
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
ility
to match film grain so you can blend a digital image into a film image and
remove the film grain as a giveaway.
Herb...
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 10:37 PM
Subject: Re: Digital grain (was Re
apply to other images.
>
> Herb...
> - Original Message -
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 10:08 PM
> Subject: Re: Digital grain (was Re: PESO My type of photographer)
>
>
> > Hmmm.
> &
gt;
Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 10:08 PM
Subject: Re: Digital grain (was Re: PESO My type of photographer)
> Hmmm.
> Foir years we struggled with low speed films like Panatomic X to try to
minimize grain. Now we're trying to find ways to put it back in .
Seriously, there are some filter
Hmmm.
Foir years we struggled with low speed films like Panatomic X to try to
minimize grain. Now we're trying to find ways to put it back in . Seriously,
there are some filters that can simulate grain. I think there's one in Kai's
Power Tools. Do a google search.
> On Tue, 7 Dec 2004 18:38:26
On 7 Dec 2004 at 18:54, Juan Buhler wrote:
> The other day I started playing in Photoshop with some grain. I was
> thinking about shooting a frame of Tri-X of a flat grey card, scanning
> that and extracting the grain, to use on digital images. Then I
> realized that good results can be obtained
On Tue, 7 Dec 2004 18:54:26 -0800, Juan Buhler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> What do the purists in the list think about these idea of fake grain?
1) That's a loaded question (that I'll have to consider before I answer), and,
2) Who, on this list, is a purist - come to think of it, what's a
On 8 Jan 2004 at 22:20, mapson wrote:
> Does the picture become more "grainy" or pixelated when shot on ISO 1600
> (or 3200) compared with ISO 200?
>
> Obviously we assume that the picture is exposed correctly in both cases.
200/3200 AWB
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~audiob/temp/IMGP0605m.jpg
Noise increases but pixellation doesn't.
Len
---
* There's no place like 127.0.0.1
From: mapson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Does the picture become more "grainy" or pixelated when shot on ISO 1600
(or 3200) compared with ISO 200?
Obviously we assume that the picture is exposed correctly in both cases.
I assume it also depends on temperature: higher temp is more noise.
Frits Wüthrich
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Juan J. Buhler
> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 12:37 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject:
On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, alex wrote:
> >Besides the higher resolution, my hypothetical digital camera would
> >let me change the ISO on a per-frame basis, so I'll be able to shot at
> >the lowest possible speed, thus minimizing grain.
>
> Given the sensor technology in digital cameras, isn't the "gra
I've struggled through an English translation of "Simulacra and Simulation";
his ideas are amazing ("the Persian Gulf war did not happen..."). I wonder
what kind of person he is day-to-day...
I can see how his philosophical inquiries relate to photography: what
happens when we make images that ar
Timothy Sherburne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In theory, software could be created that makes a photo look
more authentic
> than the original equipment did. I think I'll go read some
Jean Baudrillard
> now...
May I suggest 'For a Critique of the Political Economy of the
Sign' and 'Simulacra and
I see this whole "digital grain" process as more of an effect that you'd
apply after taking the image, in your "digital darkroom". In fact you could
have a Photoshop filter that "simulated" the grain of a particular film.
"Hmmm, I want this picture to look like it was taken with film X and
develop
54 matches
Mail list logo
