Now, I’m not saying that the original creator ran a program through those presets and created the haldCLUTS that way, but he just might have. I hate to be “that” guy, but the film simulations included on the rawpedia page very closely match the names of some of the VSCO’s preset stocks. I forget if the RT module has tools to interpolate and otherwise reduce the possibility of the result being super unpalatable, or is capable of triggering all of RT’s warnings and making the user panic.
Not all of them could and should be applied to all images, particularly the more extreme or lopsided simulations and/or raw images. I guess the first order of business is to place simulations into these buckets.Īnother thing that could be useful in documentation is to have a description on the limitations of each simulation. Further idealization, leaning more into the author’s artistic tastes and opinion, which can involve Frankenstein’s simulations, adding features to technical simulations to stretch their potential or going in a completely different direction.Same as above, but an idealized version to overcome actual or perceived limitations such as going from analog to digital, adapting to viewing conditions, following a manufacturer or brand’s digital style, or changing the temperature or mood.Variations of what an actual physical combination of film, photographic hardware and darkroom process could achieve (that could be quite broad, since one can do a lot of unconventional things in and outside of the darkroom).At the end of the day, they are looks applied to images that didn’t start out that way.
I may have said this before: the simulation depends on its author’s goal. I don’t remember the contents of the thread, but I would say, from your quote, that I used many shoulds.