X-T5 at 12,800 ISO

JNR wrote:

PeterLeyssens wrote:

JNR wrote:

a_c_skinner wrote:

Either is an objectionable artefact and people are kidding themselves that they like it.

I think "objectionable artefact" is in the mind of the beholder, and for the rest I'm pretty sure that you wouldn't want someone else's preferred aesthetic enforced onto you.

Exactly. The post you replied to sounds a bit like - this is “objectively” better so there is no alternate way of looking at it. Photography being an art form, I vehemently disagree.

As for analog vs digital noise, for me analog is more organic, whereas digital is more like fine sand being sprinkled over the photo. I'm talking about sensor noise, not grain added in post (in-camera or on a pc). I like both and they both have their place. And there is also a place for grainless photos. For character photography, I really like analog grain. But digital sensor noise I really like for adding a touch of dreaminess to landscape.

There are so many photographical techniques. It would be a shame to reduce yourself to in-focus grainless shots.

Admittedly, I am slightly changing the topic because my purpose in adding grain at the time of conversion is to mitigate the unpleasant aspects of digital grain and allow the viewer to concentrate on the image rather than the artefacts.

Have you non-photography friends really noticed artifacts in your photos?