RustyBug Offline Upload & Sell: On
|
jeffersoncasey wrote:
This is imho where people misinterpreted the result, the lux shows more saturations and contrast only at certain places, more often than not, smaller areas. To put it simply, it's like moving the clarity slider without affecting colors, some people call it microcontrast (I know, people hated that word) but I simply call it "rendering".
Moving the contrast and saturation slider obviously won't achieve this, and for my eyes that little bit of differences usually amplify when I start to edit the images.
All pots and pans look virtually the same until you start to cook with them. I mean, you don't need to agree with me......Show more →
I understand what you're saying. Folks WAY BACK when, would give me grief about my strong preference for shooting on my Kodak SLR/C ... with NO AA filter. The way I described it was similar to what you're saying about your STARTING place. The closer you are to where you want to be, the LESS you have to "push things", and the fidelity is retained, better. Deming 101 kinda of stuff. For some folks, they notice ... others, not so much.
This can apply to a variety of things ... like how folks can use PP to blur things, but it just isn't the same as a natural optical falloff, since the natural rate of transition is hard to mimic. So, whether it is acuity, saturation, falloff, etc. ... the closer it is where you want it, the better. BUT, good PP can go a long way to make up "small" diff's ... I just wouldn't expect giant leaps to bridge renderings on a regular basis.
As to some of the diffs at near distance, I'm guessing the FLE plays a part in that, too.
|