4 ms·
Wow, I thought it was really obvious which was which, which I found surprising (and I guessed before I read this comment). The thing that gives it away is that
by mkehrt 2y ago
Wow, I thought it was really obvious which was which, which I found surprising (and I guessed before I read this comment). The thing that gives it away is that the post processing means there's a uniform amount of illumination throughout the picture, which rally makes it look like an iPhone picture.
I'm never going to be bale to unsee this.
- crazygringo 2y agoThe poster said they "convey better the lighting of how the scene actually looked IRL." I dunno... I've never seen anything like the photo of the mountain (IMG_6491) in real life. The reality is that our eyes have an extremely wide range of contrast. But in that photo, the clouds are blown out and all the immediate scenery is essentially black. In real life, clouds don't get blown out, and you can see everything around you just fine in every situation where there's a big blue sky above you. The iPhone photo is a much more accurate approximation of what our eyes perceive. And the poster claims the mountains feel like more massive objects on the older camera. I'll respectfully disagree -- on the older camera, I can't judge their size because I can't see any of the landscape leading up to them for comparison. Whereas on the iPhone, I intuitively feel how massive they as my eye is drawn up the road, up the valley, up into the sky. I have full context for comparison. Of course, there's no arguing with taste. :) But maybe I can never unsee this either -- I appreciate the iPhone even more now...