Nicolas @ Flag
Some results from a test shoot with Nicolas, a new
face from Flag model agency.
Few months ago i was in my "scheve periode" and as
a result there where a lot of tilted pictures that roled out my camera, someone
told me it would last about 6 months and indeed, he was right i'm getting a bit
over it now but only to fall into another photographic style, black &
white..
Digital black & white is so different from film
based black & white, this has mostly to do with dynamic range and the
"organic" - "analogue" feel of the film based recordings.
Some software will try to mimic the effects of certain film types but as we start from a total different technology there is in fact no way to compare both.
But there also something very different that plays along in the "digital Vs. analogue" game and that's sharpness, especially the way that sharpness and detail is preserved in the finer details. Some will say "analogue is sharper than digital" and they are right up to a certain extend because if you look at an MTF chart for a film and compare it to the MTF chart of a CMOS sensor you will see where the glitch is, Digital has this steep curve with sudden loss, where details get lost and the aliasing begins, this gives a feel of extreme sharpness up to a certain level where the "frequency" of the detail extends above the "resolution" of the sensor ( when detail frequency gets too high, the digital sensor can not "see" it anymore so it does not record it and you start losing detail)
The MTF chart of a photographic film is different because of the less abrupt fall in sharpness once detail frequency gets too high, it looks more organic and therefor feels more natural.
It reminds me a bit about the discussion between "vinyl records" and the "CD" back in the eighties, it's about the same, where CD can be more snappy there is loss of detail, greatly depending on the chosen bitrate, the sound of a vinyl feels warmer to some, it's just more organic.
Some software will try to mimic the effects of certain film types but as we start from a total different technology there is in fact no way to compare both.
But there also something very different that plays along in the "digital Vs. analogue" game and that's sharpness, especially the way that sharpness and detail is preserved in the finer details. Some will say "analogue is sharper than digital" and they are right up to a certain extend because if you look at an MTF chart for a film and compare it to the MTF chart of a CMOS sensor you will see where the glitch is, Digital has this steep curve with sudden loss, where details get lost and the aliasing begins, this gives a feel of extreme sharpness up to a certain level where the "frequency" of the detail extends above the "resolution" of the sensor ( when detail frequency gets too high, the digital sensor can not "see" it anymore so it does not record it and you start losing detail)
The MTF chart of a photographic film is different because of the less abrupt fall in sharpness once detail frequency gets too high, it looks more organic and therefor feels more natural.
It reminds me a bit about the discussion between "vinyl records" and the "CD" back in the eighties, it's about the same, where CD can be more snappy there is loss of detail, greatly depending on the chosen bitrate, the sound of a vinyl feels warmer to some, it's just more organic.
Which is best? Analogue Vs? digital? My answer is
simple, they are both good but different, do not compare them.
let's get back into Nicolas's shoot, the agency
told me they already have enough black & white's for his book and the need
color portraits, so okay i'll shoot some color for you guys between the black
& white's (I shoot digital RAW anyway so there's always a color version but
i think differently about a photo for black & white)
No comments:
Post a Comment