On 5/2/2014 3:08 PM, Ken Norton wrote:
I understood it to be film. But I thought the grain was so excessive as to
ruin the image.
Um, no. I understand what you are saying, but I find that the grain,
in this case, adds a certain classical look to the image which is
artistically stimulating. Otherwise, it would be just another
run-of-the-mill sunset shot that everybody and their dog gets.
May I agree - and disagree? I've just looked at this one, and for me, there's a middle ground, with enough grain to be
interesting, but not this much.
The grain accentuation is an artifact of the K64 scanning on a Nikon
4000dpi scanner. Kodachrome is essentially a B&W film with dyes added.
Add to this is the fact that any processing (as Joel so eloquently
stated) will usually make the grain more aggressive, not less. This is
especially true when you do tonal mapping.
Agreed. Looking at the noise by frequency, there's more than just grain aliasing going on here. That's where it starts,
but other processing has done bad things to it.
I think if the grain were dealt with first, with different scan dpi and/or NR - THEN the rest of the processing applied,
the result would be much nicer. That doesn't necessarily mean no or very low grain, but more natural size grain and no
halos, etc. around it.
Clean First Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|