What is ironic about the comments about the evils of sharpness in digital images is that there is a concurrent thread about APO lenses with the subtext that the sharper the lens the better. And the darkroom technique of using unsharp masks is the analog of the digital sharpness slider. I am not sure whether these positions are inconsistent or schizophrenic. That is not to say that digital sharpness, like everything else in life, can't be overdone.
What is ironic about the comments about the evils of sharpness in digital images is that there is a concurrent thread about APO lenses with the subtext that the sharper the lens the better. And the darkroom technique of using unsharp masks is the analog of the digital sharpness slider. I am not sure whether these positions are inconsistent or schizophrenic. That is not to say that digital sharpness, like everything else in life, can't be overdone.
Is this true? I am not trying to be a smart a.... I am honestly asking because I don't know. My minimal knowledge of unsharp masks while printing does not confirm this. I can sharpen an image digitally far more than I have ever been able to do with my enlarger. On the enlarger I have always felt it was down to the performance of the camera and enlarger lenses combined with my own ability(or lack of) to focus them properly, particularly when working with large format.
Nowadays it appears that grain is back in fashion, the grittier the better. So may what goes round comes a round (again).
I don't know if grain is back in fashion or not. If it is, I'd be interested in knowing when it went out of fashion. I suspect film photographers think that grain is part of the "film look" and so they are shooting grainy film so nobody confuses what they are doing with digital. It seems to me there is more to the "film look" than grain, but maybe that is the most obvious thing they can point to, so that's what they are going with. I'd be more concerned with content.
FIlm sharpness depends only on the lens and resolution of the film. Digital sharpness depends on the lens, resolution of the sensor, plus the camera's program is artificially sharpening the image file.
Not all film has grain.
Have you ever heard of unsharp masking? Do you know it's origins?
Have you ever done it in a dark room? I sure haven't. That's the point: the sharpest lens and the sharpest film on earth won't make a scene sharper than it was, but a few actions in digital post will do just that. Everybody is used to this look so much that TMAX (a film, which was originally hated for its digital look) now looks like mush compared to the average smart phone pic.
Have you ever done it in a dark room? I sure haven't. That's the point: the sharpest lens and the sharpest film on earth won't make a scene sharper than it was, but a few actions in digital post will do just that. Everybody is used to this look so much that TMAX (a film, which was originally hated for its digital look) now looks like mush compared to the average smart phone pic.
Are you pointing out that some films have less visible grain for a given enlargement than others or that color film has dye clouds?
With film, the sharpness is quite subtle and soft even on medium format meanwhile with digital the sharpness is much more glaring and just pops out. Basically, the two have different character when it comes to sharpness. Is this just as a result of the grain sort of masking everything ?
The latter, but it doesn't just apply to color film.
The latter, but it doesn't just apply to color film.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?