Wayde Allen (wallen@boulder.nist.gov)
Tue, 12 Jan 1999 14:14:34 -0700 (MST)
On Tue, 12 Jan 1999 FotoDave@aol.com wrote:
> Well, maybe I should say I am still refining (not yet refined) because I am
> still not sure whether the softening effect caused by the factors you
> described will give a result the same as silver negatives do.
I'd be a bit surprised if they did. There are photochemical effects that
you get from the traditional silver processes that the computer generated
image doesn't specifically include.
Even if we consider that each process provides continuous tone, or a
reasonable facsimile of continuous tone, you have to keep in mind that the
photochemical processes are highly non-linear. They don't provide a
one-to-one mapping of the tones in the scene to the density recorded on
the film. Each film/developer combination tends to create its own
characteristic curve which lends a unique "look" to the resulting image.
At the microscopic level the silver grains used to create these images are
not truly random, and the correlation factors may not be well understood.
In contrast to this, the computer image is made of of highly organized
dots correlated to the design of the computer program and printer.
> Maybe it doesn't
> matter as long as the image looks good, but I will try my best to compare them
> some day.
I'm not so sure it matters that much either. If the image conveys meaning
I think the process has served its purpose. What probably matters more is
that the process you use provides the "look" you want.
- Wayde
(wallen@boulder.nist.gov)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Nov 06 1999 - 10:06:41