I would like to discuss the aesthetics of photography...

Started May 24, 2013 | Discussions thread
MoreorLess Veteran Member • Posts: 4,648
Re: I would like to discuss the aesthetics of photography...

jbf wrote:

I only take digital photographs and I'm primarily a hobbiest.  I'm not a pixel peeper and don't get involved in discussions about image quality.  The reason I'm commenting here is because I agree partially with the original quote, but I have a slightly different take on it and I'm curious what others think.

In my opinion, some film photographs have a quality that most digital photographs don't have.  I wouldn't call it "unnecessary detail", so that's where I differ from the original quote.  The closest adjective to what I see in film photographs that was used in the quoted discussion is "smooth".  It's kind of like the contrast is reduced in the film photographs but they aren't flat.  They still have great contrast, the tones are just smoother.  It's difficult to describe.  Hopefully that makes a little sense.  I'll reiterate that it's not all film photographs, just some of the very high quality ones.  Not having much expertise with film, I don't know if that quality is related to a certain type of film, or something to do with medium format film cameras, or other factors.

I've seen numerous people attempt to use post processing to replicate the "film look" in their digital images.  Most involve tweaking specific ranges of lights, darks, and midtones via Curves adjustments.  They usually add grain as well.  It's a difficult edit to do well.



I'd agree with this but I'm not really sure it relates to the original post. Smooth tonality is I'd guess the product of using a larger film format or maybe a very fine grained slow 35mm film, I find it unlikely that a E-3 is going to provide a similar kind of smooth tone.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow