On: Tue, 18 Nov 03 Bob Marchant wrote:- > William Curwen wrote:- > >> Pause for thought......how many of us 'high-end' digital practioners have >> ever seen true fidelity colour in either capture and/or in reproduction? > > Hi William , > > This is what we do everyday . I admit there are still some limitations > imposed by the 'colour scientists ' at the manufacturers who want to give > us "pretty" colour , but we have workarounds for when this really is a > problem ( rarely ) . But we still believe that we have the best tools for > the jobs that come our way ( See below )
Hiya Bob, that's because you understand "the theory" ...... and unlike many, you have taken it upon yourself to break down everything you know and understand about light and colour into their smallest intellectual components, only to build it all back up again - properly. Thus real knowledge, and the math involved is both simple and beautiful. We can and do agree on this. >> I say this as a lot of what is said about high-end capture is wishful >> hearsay. > > Ouch ! Yep, and for some it really hurts - aka:- those who are unwilling to learn the theory underlying their own individual practice will always be in the hands of others. When somebody uses a big word I don't understand, I ask, and the response is often surprising. Sometimes it is better not to ask and nod with secret satisfaction that some people have no idea of what they are talking about. Almost like they have only a half-formed soul - I digress. >> In fact, with a bit of lateral thinking about post-signal processing it is >> possible for anyone on a low-to-no budget to achieve really excellent >> fidelity of colour and tonality with lo-fi digital capture. I kid you not. > > I am still gobsmacked by the quality of your scans and prints using the > skills that you have honed over the years . And yes it is possible ( > especially for you ! ) to squeeze a whole load more detail out of a lo-fi > camera with multiple exposures, multiple exports, layering and blending > etc etc When I wake up in the morning I thank the corporate scientists who invented blu-tak and velcro for me. The secret is a good nights sleep and not to speak during the first hour of the day. Avoid television and read comics. > But at the end of the day , if you start with a system that already has a > massive dynamic range ,with extremely low noise with dedicated digital > lenses and software that allows 'profiling' within the limited sense that > cameras can be profiled ( maybe we should say calibrated ) , then your > already on to a winner. In addition to the extra quality that is inherent > with these systems, there are also huge savings to be made timewise. > These savings can be used as a creative resource rather than a financial > one , and this really does come into play on lots of our projects. The other week a photo-pal of mine showed me the true exposure bracketing capabilities of a Canon 1ds - I went nuts. Awesome possibilities - truly I would like to be in the position of working with high-end digital and none of it would be wasted on me. Something like a Hassy with an Imacon chip and proper money chucked at it. Something that will work properly - for me. I think high-end digital is a certain 'state of mind' with infinite creative possibilities - for this is what you paid for - and - when it all trickles down to the prosumer in a few years time.....there will still be relatively few out there who really do understand their theory, and it still won't be rocket science either. More like mental telepathy. > Regards, and of course respect, Alright, and big it up for the rest of us. <G> > Bob Marchant. Respect William Curwen =============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
