This is not so good if it comes to simulating film behavior, as the contrast is an integral part of the look. Many don't simulate contrast at all and let you freely set the contrast in the software. Then we have how film contrast is simulated. I think it may be necessary to make a multi-illuminant simulation to match colors well over a wider range. How colors are modulated when you change light is probably quite different from film to camera, which is something I'd like to experiment if making film simulation software. Still it will probably depend quite a bit on which light the matching was made, which likely is something similar to D50. Others like DxO (and RPP I assume) are based on test charts which I think is more reliable. Many of the simulations are simply by eye manual hand-tunings for some specific picture, the HALD package for rawtherapee is that AFAIK. Personally I don't really care what the reason is, I find film simulation to be an interesting technical challenge.īut let's first answer the question why the look is so different. For this to work the film simulation must behave quite accurately. So you can work with light meters etc and learn film shooting technique without wasting any film frames. The philosophical question "why bother?" I'd answer like this: think of photographers that want to learn shoot film, or those that shoot both film and digital, and want the look to match. Simulating films is an interesting challenge and sometime in the distant future it might be something I'll try to develop software in. Don't you think it a reasonable idea to kind of set yesteryear's technology aside in our minds and just explore what we can do with an unconstrained mindset using today's highly flexible digital workflows?
Maybe for other kinds of images it's too saturated? These days we can create a bespoke interpretation for each kind of photo we make, wherein the tonality is totally under our control and we can render it just about any way we like. Maybe for a number of images it blocks-up shadow detail too much. But my question is "why bother"? What is there about Velvia that makes it superior to the kind of dial-in perfection (to our taste) we can obtain just making the best possible digital rendition that our raw converter and our skills allow? Velvia has a fixed chracteristic curve, like all film. May I ask a philosophic question? And let me preface by saying - each to his/her own when it comes to taste, so your desire to replicate some kind of "Velvia look" is perfectly legitimate.
0 kommentar(er)
