Remember film grain?

Discussion in 'Digital SLR' started by RichA, Jul 23, 2005.

  1. RichA

    RichA Guest

    No one (except in the case of something like 1600-3200 ASA colour
    or Tri-X) ever cared much about graininess. So if substantial
    noise is impossible to get rid of in a digital image, why
    isn't there some kind of software program that could "convert"
    the digital noise so it had the consistency of film grain?
    From an aesthetic point of view, it might even be acceptable.
    RichA, Jul 23, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. RichA

    JPS Guest

    In message <>,
    Try upsampling to about 300%, and then run the PS "diffuse" filter a few
    times. This will make the shape of the pixels and the noise a little
    more complex. I often do this to get rid of pixelation in low-PPI
    prints. The center of the deformed pixel blobs will still be pretty
    much the original center, though. What would be better yet is some kind
    of filter that arbitrarily misplaced the center of the pixels, sort of
    like arbitrarily extending some of the upsized pixels in various
    directions, and shrinking the remainder; IOW, make the sizes of the
    original pixels vary, and offset their centers, to get rid of the
    gridding. A large, very complex grid mesh for the liquid filter might
    accomplish this.

    This distorts the noise and the image. If you just want to distort
    noise, to be more grainlike, you may as well remove the noise and start
    from scratch, or subtract the denoised image from the original, if you
    want to work with the original noise. I don't think there's anything
    particularly desireable about sensor or digitization noise, myself.
    JPS, Jul 23, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. RichA

    Pete D Guest

  4. Not true... if the neg has grain, when making large prints it is always
    important to make sure the grain is sharp, expecially in the print's
    corners. Anything less looked very sloppy.
    Not true, ISO 1600~3200 digital noise is easily reduced to very tolerable
    levels with many programs, some of them free. Even the worst digital
    noise can be minimized to a level an old film shooter would feel is
    better than bad grain.
    Digital noise appears the reverse of film grain, because usually it is
    apparent only in the dark areas; film grain is more objectionable in the
    light areas of an image. The consistency you want is a quality step
    backward, if you're shooting digital.
    Generations of film photographers happily accepted grain as the price of
    speed, so there's no reason why digital noise should not be equally
    acceptable for its own particular texture. Each medium has its own pros
    and cons... one does not fault an oil painting for being thick and
    "lumpy" in comparison to a flat watercolor.

    From the aesthetic point of view, I often prefer a bit of digital noise
    to give a certain flatness and paper-like "tooth" to an image, unlike the
    3-D slickness associated with ferrotyped prints
    Charles Gillen, Jul 23, 2005
  5. RichA

    Brian Baird Guest

    Er, "Film Grain" filter, anyone?

    Works great.
    Brian Baird, Jul 24, 2005
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.