Quoted By:
How is it that we as a photographic community seem to have gone backwards in terms of colour accuracy? I keep seeing posts about how the world 'used to be more colourful', however I've noticed a different trend evolve since the start of digital photography. If you look at older photos, maybe ten years ago or older, the editing styles seem to have changed drastically compared to how photographers edit today. Picrel is an example of what I'm talking about. Notice that the photo has been hit hard in terms of tonality, with really strong, mostly unnatural looking contrast. The colours saturation and hue seem to be mostly untouched, aside from a bit extra on the greens. Also notice a distinct lack of colour grading, which is my main complaint about modern editing styles. Cameras now, at least Canon and Nikon seem to have colours at least as good as they did ten to fifteen years ago, so what gives? Have we moved past the natural beauty of the world? Has the return of film given zoomers false nostalgia? I thought we loved digital for it's lifelike colours, or at least I do. It's hard to find modern photographers that don't colour grade, or try and do these sickening teal/magenta colour grades. Everything has to look le retro. I have a feeling people are going to look back on film simulations the way we look back on photos like picrel or Ken Rockwell's work. Sorry for the unorganised thoughts, wanted to get it out there.
