From a personal point, the more I take the harder it is to please myself. In essence it’s what pleases the eye of the photographer I suppose. How does one define the difference between a "digital image" and an "analogue (film) image"? Once both are inside of a computer, does it matter? Should both be treated the same way, or differently? Is it acceptable to bring out detail in a film image that wasn't really noticeable when I took the photo? For example, is it fair to bring out the detail in the shadows? Ansel would have used settings that he KNEW would capture that detail. As to whether that is good or bad, I can't answer. The previous image I posted is what I remember.ĭoes all that filtering make the image into a "digital" image, rather than a "film capture"? I think it does. If that is true, how far can I go to make the photograph represent what I felt and saw at the moment I took the photo? (.and in the photos above, the Nik Collection photo is not what I remember.
If I had the ability of Ansel Adams, I would know how to capture what I was thinking. The camera is more realistic than my eye/brain. On the other hand, my eyes have a wonderful way to see "what I think is there", and sometimes that is limited by the ability of a camera to see what my brain was thinking when I first saw the original scene. The end result may be interesting, but it may no longer represent what it was about the original scene that caused me to lift up my camera and take the photo in the first place.
I never thought of it the way you describe it. The more digital filtering I do, the less information from the original image capture is left. how far does one go with digital filters such that the analogue (film) image becomes almost indistinguishable from a ‘pure’ digital shot?ĭigital filters can't ADD anything to an image - they work their magic by REMOVING stuff from an image, just like a colored filter in front of a lens. I'd like to shoot both, using whichever one feels the most appropriate at the time. I don't want to start shooting film instead of shooting digital. Maybe I should soon stop posting about this, and just start using it.
I feel better when I do all the editing, trying to accomplish what my brain thinks might be a good way to view the original image. It's addicting, but it's like giving my negative to someone else to edit. and Nik Collection represents what some other photographer did, and it in no way represents what I did myself. For better or worse, the camera didn't make the photograph - I did. and the end result is what's important, not the tool". It reminds me of something I was taught long ago, " The camera to a photographer should be like a wrench to a mechanic - it's just a tool, to do the job. Together they become a useful tool to digitize my film images, and get them into my image editor (DxO PhotoLab4). The Plustek, and VueScan, no longer seem so "important" to me. Later today I hope to pick up my recently taken negatives, and work on some of them. I must have been getting tired, too, as after spending what felt like forever removing dust marks, I never thought to do it to the sky. Maybe I was just tired - I ought to have looked at the work that was actually being done by clicking on that pre-set. Actually, I wasn't intending to use pre-sets at all, I was curious how they would affect my image. I didn't use Nik Tools very often, as it was someone else's interpretation of my images, not my own. Last night I was wondering what the possibilities were with Nik & B&W, and out of the long list of choices the only one I sort of liked was "wet rocks". Watching videos by "photo Joseph" and others was my training, and they preferred to use individual tools. For color images, I avoided the pre-sets, and and learned how to use the individual tools. Otherwise, you're doing ok so take the view that your understanding of the workflow is 100% better this week than it was last thanks. In my experience, many of the presets are generally horrible and destructive, especially with files derived from film scans. Just a tip try not to fall into the trap of simply using the presets from the list of thumbnails in SFX because a. Your learning curve with Nik will be longer and steeper than it would if you take the time to learn how use the control points for localised editing and the adjustment tools for global editing sympathetically with each other and b. Hallo Gast!ĭu willst die Bilder sehen? Einfach registrieren oder anmelden! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content. It brings out the contrast that makes the image more "alive". Here's what I get after applying the filter. One of the filters has the name "Wet Rocks".
It is a series of filters that can be applied to any image processed in PhotoLab4. While processing the second image, DxO PhotoLab4 includes a toolset named "Nik Collection".