Filmscanners mailing list archive (firstname.lastname@example.org)
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[filmscanners] Re: Scanner calibration
Yes, exactly. He used color filters when shooting his exposures, used
dodging and burning, used toners, and at later times, used someone else
to print his work in the darkroom...
Heck, worst of all, he turned most of the world into black and white!!!!
Such deceit! Obviously, his prints can't be trusted. ;-)
Norman Unsworth wrote:
> By that definition Ansel Adams was the biggest cheat going. He modified his
> pictures in the printing process significantly, not to display what he'd
> captured as 'realistic', but to translate what he'd captured on film into
> his vision of what he'd seen / previsualized when taking the picture.
> Norman Unsworth
> -----Original Message-----
> From: email@example.com
> [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]On Behalf Of Anthony Atkielski
> Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 4:30 AM
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Scanner calibration
> Arthur writes:
>>Are you sure altering color balance isn't
> That depends on the direction of the alteration. If you alter colors to
> match real life, it's not cheating at all; if you alter them to create some
> sort of departure from real life, it is "cheating" (with respect to
> representing the image as an image from real life).
> I correct colors to make sure the image looks like real life. The typical
> example is correcting light from streetlights on Provia so that they have
> the proper pinkish-orange color that HPS lamps appear to have in real life,
> instead of the yellowish-green rendered by Provia.
>>The film is probably recording a more accurate
>>color temperature than our eye does.
> True for blackbody light sources, not true for discontinuous sources such as
> discharge lamps, which don't have a real color temperature to begin with.
> Film will often react much differently to discontinuous sources than will
> our eyes, so the film rendering has to be corrected.
> Additionally, even if film records blackbodies correctly, to make things
> look real we must simulate the "automatic white balance" of the human eye to
> some extent. It's true that real-world images in shadow are very blue
> indeed, but we don't notice that much in real life; and if the objective of
> the photo is to create the same perception that we had in real life, some
> adjustments are necessary.
>>As you know, we color adjust chemically and
>>reduce the blue component we see in shadows.
> No chemical adjustment is required. The brain handles white balance
> adjustments. Direct fatigue of retinal cells is much less of a factor, and
> much shorter in duration.
Unsubscribe by mail to firstname.lastname@example.org, with 'unsubscribe
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or