--- Graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But digital images do have a digital look to them. It has been
> called the "cartoon effect". It smooths out detail, and
colors by
> normalizing adjacent areas. Even very high res digital images
have that that look
> though not to the extent of lower res images. You can do
something similar with
> film by using a Softar filter but it is not exactly the same.
As long as
> digital uses separate pixels for different colors it is not
possible to completely
> eliminate that effect as it is inherent in the process.
It's amazing how you can ascribe a name to something that no one
has ever heard of and just state, "People say..." What is this,
Fox News?
Each pixel records a certain specific intensity, in the color of
its R, G, or B lens. It is this intensity map which defines the
detail in the image. Color, and only color, is interpolated by
looking at the adjacent pixel pattern and evaluating a final mix
of RG&B for the target pixel's value. There's no
"normalization" or smoothing.
Sharpening, contrast adjustment, saturation, etc are all add-on
transformations in the image rendering. Any camera which
supports RAW file output allows the photographer to control the
precise degree of application of these transforms.
Luminance smoothing or chrominance noise reduction are
additional operations which are available to the image
processor. Good cameras allow photographers to control them with
built-in JPEG creation, or only apply them as part of the RAW
post processing in companion software.
The net result is that there is no "digital look"; the term is
just as meaningless as "cartoon effect". Show me two identical,
unprocessed pictures taken with a film and a digital camera of
comparable quality, and tell me what constitutes to you a
"digital look" in the comparison.
Godfrey
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
