Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: What is a "film look" ????

  1. #1

    Default What is a "film look" ????

    I have heard people talking about "film look" photo in the digital era but never given must thoughts about what is "film look". I've found this discussion in DP review is very interesting which I lik to share:

    http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...5282277&page=1

  2. #2

    Default Re: What is a "film look" ????

    The grass is alway greener syndrome. Or, you only appreciate something when you don't have it anymore! LOLZ!

  3. #3

    Default Re: What is a "film look" ????

    there really is a great diff bet film and digital. of course, i use totally digital nowadays cos i just find it so much easier (and dun have a lens for my dad's film slr)

    there's just a more '3D' feel to the pic, and it looks nice and rustic, even if scanned in. of course many argue that film captures the 'actual' image, while digital is just a 'representation' of the actual image with RGB. im not too sure if theres much difference there

    of course the most significant would be black and white film. thats real black and white (or greyscale, rather), compared to converting a pic in photoshop or any other software

  4. #4
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: What is a "film look" ????

    If people want to reduce a process to its lowest parts, nothing would make any sense. If pple say that digital is a representation of the actual image with RGB, then film is merely a representation of the actual image with halide crystals.

    Quote Originally Posted by 2.8photography View Post
    there really is a great diff bet film and digital. of course, i use totally digital nowadays cos i just find it so much easier (and dun have a lens for my dad's film slr)

    there's just a more '3D' feel to the pic, and it looks nice and rustic, even if scanned in. of course many argue that film captures the 'actual' image, while digital is just a 'representation' of the actual image with RGB. im not too sure if theres much difference there

    of course the most significant would be black and white film. thats real black and white (or greyscale, rather), compared to converting a pic in photoshop or any other software

  5. #5

    Default Re: What is a "film look" ????

    I believe a better way to see if there is a difference between film and digital is to look at the prints. Not the images on the computer screen.

    Not a question of "which is better", but what is the difference, and if the "difference" matters if there is indeed a "difference".

  6. #6

    Default Re: What is a "film look" ????

    Quote Originally Posted by vince123123 View Post
    If people want to reduce a process to its lowest parts, nothing would make any sense. If pple say that digital is a representation of the actual image with RGB, then film is merely a representation of the actual image with halide crystals.
    haha yeah. totally agree

    thats wat some pros say (wont mention who) though. film is basically a chemical reaction thingy when the film is exposed to light (some parts) so dun see wats so 'actual' abt thats

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,095

    Default Re: What is a "film look" ????

    Quote Originally Posted by 2.8photography View Post
    there really is a great diff bet film and digital. of course, i use totally digital nowadays cos i just find it so much easier
    The "so much easier" is IMHO the greatest difference between film and solid-state electronic sensors. Now, film certainly has some peculiar characteristics of its own. These characteristics fall mostly into the category "artefact". But many years of being conditioned to what film looks like may mean that something else, even if it were objectively better, may look "wrong" (unless you add some of the artefacts back).

    But expectations change. Digital images have been more the norm than the exception in many areas. Looking back at some "great" pictures in older issues of e.g. National Geographic, they don't look so great anymore to me than they once did - often very grainy, unnatural colour reproduction, etc.

    of course the most significant would be black and white film. thats real black and white (or greyscale, rather), compared to converting a pic in photoshop or any other software
    I don't see how either one is any more "real" than the other. I suspect that some oldtimers say "real" when they mean "traditional", as in a digital image is not a "real" photo. At this point it boils down to whether you define photography via a specific process (silver bromide gelatin) or not. The underlying process has changed many times in the history of photography; to a Daguerrotype or Kalotype fan, 20th century film images may not be the "real" thing either.

  8. #8

    Default Re: What is a "film look" ????

    For one thing, (negative) film still has greater dynamic range compared to digital sensors, although I think it's less of an issue today. Digital sensors are probably closer to reversal film in terms of dynamic range and color gradation. That probably explains the so-called "3D" look of film since you have virtually no 'color banding' problems.

    Even then, when you compare slide film to digital, the real difference is when you project it onto a big screen - slides wins hands down in color reproduction and resolution. I always feel a sense of 'shiokness' when I look at my slides through the loupe...but alas, getting lazier to shoot in slide nowadays. All stored in the freezer...
    Last edited by Ah Pao; 23rd October 2007 at 07:45 AM.

  9. #9

    Default Re: What is a "film look" ????

    Quote Originally Posted by vince123123 View Post
    If people want to reduce a process to its lowest parts, nothing would make any sense. If pple say that digital is a representation of the actual image with RGB, then film is merely a representation of the actual image with halide crystals.
    Worse... when you shoot negatives, it's a double process.. It's a representation of a representation of the actual image. Each has it's own non-linear response curve. At least for digital, the dynamic response can be mapped and calibrated. What can be a better representation of the real thing?

    25 years back, people were arguing about the same thing.. vinyls vs CDs.
    Last edited by lsisaxon; 23rd October 2007 at 05:42 PM.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Volcano Land
    Posts
    2,357

    Default Re: What is a "film look" ????

    You are really funny

    Ah Pao: When you're talking about projecting onto the big screen, the main problem here is that digital projectors aren't up to the mark right?

  11. #11

    Default Re: What is a "film look" ????

    Quote Originally Posted by Yatlapball View Post
    You are really funny

    Ah Pao: When you're talking about projecting onto the big screen, the main problem here is that digital projectors aren't up to the mark right?
    Use 9 or 16 XGA projectors to form the entire high resolution image.

  12. #12

    Default Re: What is a "film look" ????

    Quote Originally Posted by lsisaxon View Post
    Worse... when you shoot negatives, it's a double process.. It's a representation of a representation of the actual image. Each has it's own non-linear response curve. At least for digital, the dynamic response can be mapped and calibrated. What can be a better representation of the real thing?

    25 years back, people were arguing about the same thing.. vinyls vs CDs.
    Haha, sometimes a totally accurate representation may not be what we want. What we remember with our mind's eye may not be what the camera has recorded. However, with digital, the control of adjustment has been moved from the lab tech to the photographer. There's less ambiguity involved.

    There's a multitude of factors affecting the final output, so unless you're learning photography as hard science instead of an art, just learn to accept its strengths and shortcomings - and enjoy it! Each medium has its own merits.

    Quote Originally Posted by Yatlapball View Post
    Ah Pao: When you're talking about projecting onto the big screen, the main problem here is that digital projectors aren't up to the mark right?
    Yeap...unfortunately digital projectors still have obvious pixels that can be seen. Perhaps the 2K/4K digital projectors used in cinemas can help?
    Last edited by Ah Pao; 24th October 2007 at 09:55 PM.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •