[Recercare]

That's an interesting outlook, but I'm really not sure if noise and sharpness are specific to plastic looking photographs though. From where I see things, I often feel as though film grain and noise are the trends of the past in much the same way classic cars are in our day. And though most of us love the classics, I can honestly say that I am no sooner compelled to using one than I would a modern vehicle.

On the issue of photographic evolution, I get the feeling that as long as we are working to catch-up to our own visual stimulus, then so too will the objectives we set continue to move forward. ie. when I stand in my living room and experience both the the outdoor light and ambiance of the room around me(no extended DR needed), I am reminded of the headroom we have with regards to advancements.

I also beleive noise to falls under similar category too. ie. when the lights go down and my pupils dilate, my visual sense seems not impaired by shadow noise(for example). And so I'm thinking that our appetite for sensor development will remain justifiable until we reach a point where camera sensors will either match or exceed our own visual experience.

My two cents...


PS. Image grain is an essential aspect of digital imaging(smooth gradients & color transitions). Though in a perfect world... the ideal would be using it without having to sacrifice detail in the process

There's nothing wrong with improved technology. The problem is when people get fixated on technicalities and delete interesting pictures, or avoid shooting at all, simply because there's (or will be) noticeable noise at ISO 4000. Another example: they choose to keep an ordinary boring landscape pic because everything is sharp and within dynamic range. Then, two hours later, at the same spot, a mysterious fog creeps in which is interesting because fog is very uncommon in that area... ...but this picture gets deleted as it was impossible to recover an insignificant amount of blown highlights.

Kind regards
.lars