Back to the Past

I don't find the whole thing very convincing at all ... the Fuji Reala example in particular. Roll the mouse over the image and bang ... saturation increases along with contrast and all the shadow detail in the foreground hills in the image disappears! :rolleyes:
 
Keith, in the future our grandsons will not know how Reala looked like...They must believe to Ko-FujiD consortium
 
That means it's your duty to keep your fridge stocked with every available film along with processing chemicals so that the future photogs can get a glimps of how it should look Lazar. :p
 
Ah, now I have the right for some space in the fridge. Moreover. I'll add neccessary documents and workflow schematics for the next generation, but seems the timeline extends. I already have 2 grandsons
 
Erik, but I prefer one second hand Bessa R + skopar for the same price. I will add TriX bulk for a bit more then its price.
 
ErikFive said:
Exposure 2 is actually quite good when you learn to use it properly:)
Click to expand...

Maybe so Erik but I don't think the examples shown are much to write home about.

The Tmax 3200 is another shocker. If that's how the software represents high ISO Kodak film grain count me out! Perhaps my monitor is crappy or mal adjusted but that looks like sh*t! :p
 
God I hate softening effects. Why in jeebus's name would you ever want to make a photo look like it was developed in vaseline? It doesn't iron out flaws in peoples skin, it just makes it obvious that they'd rather look at picture that looks like it was taken through a coke bottle than look at their wrinkles!
 
some of them are nice.
I can imagine it is not for an advanced photoshop user who can make his own set of adjustments to get a desired effect, but more for those who want a bit more from their everyday digital shots...
 
ErikFive said:
A friend of mine just sold 30000$ worth of prints where he had used this software so I guess it looks ok printed in real life. Its like judging the perfomance of the M8 looking at the jpeg shots on flickr:) You have to see the stuff printed to see how it looks.
Click to expand...

I guess you're right Erik ... it is the end result that counts after all and how the software is used is very instrumental in that result no doubt.

I still think those examples are overkill ... but maybe they're trying to cater to the semi blind who lack visual subtlety!
 
Sometimes I use the Virtual Photographer from optikVerve plug-in for PS. I like it, but I don't have the developer and fixer smels. Also, I need this whirl...shshsot...klak...rewind sounds. Nothing can be done about. In my fridge I'll keep records of hese sounds in casette (no, no CD) fro the grand-grandchildren to be complete as possible side by side with Beatles platers I have since 35 years ago
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom