That "film look," are we creating a false memory?

Discussion in 'Photographic Discussions' started by Tim Tucker 2, Jan 20, 2019.

  1. Ysarex

    Ysarex Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2011
    Messages:
    6,254
    Likes Received:
    2,881
    Location:
    St. Louis
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Very difficult to show in this venue (Internet forum) since there's such a huge variation in all the reproductions available online, but in the original presentation of that photo many believe that Natl. Geo/McCury crossed the journalistic line with more than just a bit of light adjustment and so the term "duped." It is controversial to say the least with many Natl. Geo/McCury defenders claiming this and other of his photos were not substantially altered and suggesting that the Natl. Geo format should be given more leeway as it is not strictly a news publication. On the other side critics insist the journalistic line applies to Natl. Geo and it's a zero tolerance line. I've been aware of the controversy and so used it in the context of this thread making the point that whether an image is manipulated isn't a "digital/film thing." Here's an article that addressed the controversy: https://petapixel.com/2016/06/07/eyes-afghan-girl-critical-take-steve-mccurry-scandal/ and a Google search will turn up much more.

    Joe


     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. Grandpa Ron

    Grandpa Ron No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2018
    Messages:
    316
    Likes Received:
    106
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I think it is interesting how folk like to overthink an issue.

    While I prefer an "as shot" photo because to me it is more natural. There is nothing wrong with wanting to enhance a photo.

    Yes, to me it makes things look artificial, but other feel it makes the object more life like.

    Photography is one of my many hobbies , so I do not have to worry if my photo will sell. Nor do I need to track the latest market trends. I am free to do what I like.

    However, if I had to feed my family, I would have to do whatever the market required. There is nothing mystical here.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Soocom1

    Soocom1 No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    Messages:
    1,655
    Likes Received:
    490
    Location:
    Southwest US
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit


    Tom Sawyer Abroad by Mark Twain:
    Tom and Huck are in a hot air balloon...
    Tom and Huck argue over where they are at...

    “What’s the reason we ain’t?”

    “I know by the color. We’re right over Illinois yet. And you can see for yourself that Indiana ain’t in sight.”

    “I wonder what’s the matter with you, Huck. You know by the COLOR?”

    “Yes, of course I do.”

    “What’s the color got to do with it?”

    “It’s got everything to do with it. Illinois is green, Indiana is pink. You show me any pink down here, if you can. No, sir; it’s green.”

    “Indiana PINK? Why, what a lie!”

    “It ain’t no lie; I’ve seen it on the map, and it’s pink.”



    Now that is because the impression given Huck is because he interpreted the map colors to being in real life.

    When I hit about 23, I had noticed that on VHS the movie Oh god LOOKED old, rater than the sharp realistic colors I remember when i went to see it in the theaters. And I had wondered why that was?
    Colors can also fade on magnetic tape from what I found out.

    I have seen Kodachrome slides of Coney Island from 1946 that look as clean now as they did in the 1940's and saw images of WWII shot on slide film that are about as clean as something out of a 80D Canon.

    This "film look" is IMO only because those trying to emulate it see it as older images probably not kept in good shape.
    I still have pictures from 1985 that look as clean today as when they were shot.

    But moreover there is something else most do not consider:
    Film is 3 dimensional. ergo: Silver hylaide and the color layers create a microscopic depth aspect that digital simply cannot emulate because it is almost perfectly flat.
    I know that digital sensors have depth, but not the same way silver is.
    Moreover, digital is also not subject to the color variation (burnt orange anyone) of color film, or the off whitish grey of B&W.

    I understand the grain aspect but the TMAX and later the Kodak color film that sped up the 100 speed grain meant that grain was becoming less an issue. then whamo..digital. All bets off.

    Medium format is better off than small format for obvious reasons. But the grain size was still the same. it simply didn't need as much enlargement (I thing someone already pointed that out.)

    The digital kids dont know about this because when they were mostly born, digital was starting to take off. sorta like those who grew up with color TV and never saw an old Phiclo 9 inch.
     

Share This Page