On: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 Bob Marchant wrote:- >> As in scanned film grain as screen composited with digital file in >> Photoshop? > > Yes William, along those lines.
Plus a bit of bump-mapping and displacement perhaps? I digress. >> ...... or written out onto film and rescanned - close but not >> *quite* film grain. > > Sorry...don't do film ;-). Sorry...I do, and completely hooked on Pan-F and Rodinal - scans up a treat. >> Real film grain wraps itself around the light during processing, which gives >> it that film look. > > I'm gonna have to do another comparison. Nothing but nothing compares with film.....would anyone like to buy me a Nikon D70? That was a joke - actually, I could do a lot with a D70. >> I thinks peeps should use film when they want the look of film, and I am not >> exactly sure what digital looks like. Anything you want, I guess. > > It's choice that separates us from the apes (close shave in my > circumstances!) Apes don't shave - what a silly thing to say. Mind you, I am constantly being told to stop dragging my knuckles as it frightens Asbo, my neighbours dog. I live in an interesting neighbourhood. >> Why, I could write about this all day. > > I wish you would. Ahhhh - at last, something of interest to say on ProDIG - you have encouraged me. So watch this space over the next day or so. Respect William Curwen =============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
