Spectral light would degrade the dye layers along the entire range of the medium, leading to tremendous tonality rendering. And again, this is where literally all digital approach absolutely suck, and are virtually all similar to identical.Ĭreative negative print film on the other hand, took spectral light data and transformed it into a fully fledged image. The problem is still turning that light data into an image. It’s worse than a render using RGB light! A digital sensor captures spectral light, and then some crappy math is applied to modify the levels so that they create a math-bogus-fit set of lights that sort of kind of almost will generate a stimulus of the light it actually captured.īut in the end, it’s just dull light data. Light data is just what it says… it’s just boring emission levels. That might seem like a foolish semantic twist at first, but once you dip your toe into the background, it’s sort of a mind ripping observation. This is a fantastic observation that leads to a subsequent one digital cameras are vastly different to what we had with film cameras. I mean computing the render as ONE wave that gets decomposed into RGB after render, just like in a camera sensor sounds like more accurate to me
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |