this post was submitted on 02 Sep 2025
493 points (98.4% liked)
People Twitter
8114 readers
866 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
How much of that is in-camera?
Early photographic treatments had terrible response for longer wavelengths, which is why wrinkles looked fucking awful. It lost all the subsurface scattering that makes skin soft. Basically you got the blue channel from any modern color photograph. I suspect that effect could work in color, in 1981, with some goofy color balance and incorrect lighting... but I'm not certain. I know color photos made black subjects look dark as hell until wooden furniture catalogs forced Kodak to develop a better formulation. I don't think the typical effect was quite so... onyx.
The effect could also be thrown by the color of the jacket and the wall. They look black and beige, respectively, but the jacket could be burgundy and get lost in a blue gel filter. Maybe only the red of her lips is touched-up.
It’s a black and white photo colourised by hand.
Well that's fucking boring.
Good job on the color grading in what are technically the midtones, but come on, I wanted this to somehow be real light hitting this badass bitch.