Comment by eviks
8 hours ago
> with low compression to keep things like grain.
But you have algorithmic grain in modern codecs, so no need to waste so much space for noise?
8 hours ago
> with low compression to keep things like grain.
But you have algorithmic grain in modern codecs, so no need to waste so much space for noise?
This grain looks extremely fake.
Because one is genuine physics and another is a fake crap?
the calculations and the photons sent to your eyes are all genuine physics
One’s an accurate recording of how a real thing looked.
The other’s fake noise.
One’s a real photo from 1890. The other’s an old-timey instagram filter.
It makes sense that some folks might care about the difference. Like, I love my old family Polaroids. I would not want a scanned version of those to have the “noise” removed for compression’s sake. If that had been done, I’d have limited interest in adding fake noise back to them. By far my favorite version to have would be the originals, without the “noise” smoothed out at all.
Lots of folks have similar feelings about film. Faked grain isn’t what they’re after, at all. It’s practically unrelated to what they’re looking for.
8 replies →