Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/09/02
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]> Op 2-sep-06, om 19:04 heeft Ted Grant het volgende geschreven: > >> Yes I know some folks almost barf about shooting at 3200 and go on about >> grain, oops pardon me... "noise'' ;-) Another one of those stupid >> non-photographer electronic words I find bloody annoying when it >> could've been called "electronic grain" then everyone who were real film >> shooters would've known what the effect looked like. And what the hell >> digi people were talking about. > > I do think that there's a big visual difference between grain and noise. > When seen from a (too) short distance, I always felt that grain produced > beautiful and naturally irregular transitions of tone (esp. in B/W). Must > be that beautiful chemical reaction in negative development on the > silver. > The regularity of digital noise makes it visually less attractive for me. > So I wouldn't just change 'noise' into 'digital grain'. There is a > difference. And noise is less acceptable than grain. > Just a feeling... > > Philippe > More then a feeling i,m sure. There is a lot of info on the web on this .If i remember correctly even the structure of the grain lumps is influenced by the optics , so related to the recorded image and not due to a random distibution. As usual sorry for the yuckspeak simon jes.