Winsor Crosby wrote:
>You seem to think that sharpening artifacts are something that must
>accompany digital images. You say it reminds you of why you shoot film.
>Sharpening artifacts can be the result of any overuse of the tool with
>digital or scanned film images. You can make it look as soft as you
>want.
>
Well, they certainly are common on web images, so one who is a
predisposed to dislike digital images might be excused for thinking them
to almost be an (un)natural part of digitally produced images. Seeing
only 8 bit, highly reduced and compressed images on the web is
certainly not a great way to be able to judge the quality of images.
Sharpening and compression artifacts aren't a necessary part of images
from digital cameras. And those from most DSLRs at reasonable isos, in
RAW images or JPEGs of modest compression and with reasonable internal
sharpening settings are remarkably smooth. Free, in fact, from the
artifact* of grain so familiar to us from film that we take it for
granted, and even sometimes as an asset.
More sophisticated sharpening can avoid the particularly annoying halo
effect.
* a part of the image which was not visible in the subject and which is
a result of the process of creating the image.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|