0

Given, the fact that every camera has a distinct photo look in its result, is there a technical term that is used for denoting this aspect, which basically denotes the nature of photos a particular camera or lens takes? Basically a term which signifies photo characteristics as a whole.

For example, this question discusses "leica look".

What is the Leica look?

Is there a specific term for these outcomes?

  • 3
    I think you may be starting from a false premise - but could you clarify what you mean by "distinct photo look"? The differences between cameras are extremely subtle compared to, for instance the differences between lenses. – Tetsujin May 5 at 14:22
  • I meant, that particular camera would take bright shots, or some lenses would.. Even the colors, i mean the characteristic of the lens or camera – Vibhu May 5 at 14:26
  • 1
    With respect to the question you've linked, see the conclusion: "I think a modern photograph on a Leica has no more of a special look than any other professional camera with a professional prime". While some of this may have been true historically, it's just not any more. – Philip Kendall May 5 at 15:08
  • 1
    OK, so: could you give a specific example of what you think indicates the "look or feel" of a Canon 5D Mark IV vs a Canon 1DX Mark II vs a Nikon D850? – Philip Kendall May 5 at 15:09
  • 2
    @Vibhu Many of these images are over-post-processed. It's not Canon-vs-Nikon, it is a matter of personal taste of the person doing the post processing. – xenoid May 5 at 22:36
2

After thinking about this for several seconds, I would suggest that at the very most any difference at all would be very subtle. That said, how could one begin to identify such a quality?

Suppose you had an infinitely interchangeable camera system where you could change one factor at a time (like a specific lens or a specific sensor or a specific system of interior flare-reducing baffles within the camera body or even the kind of black anti-reflecting coatings within the system). Then, you had a cadre of photographers with different interests such as portrait, landscape, street, and such.

Then, you mix-and-match the work and compare a pile of un-cropped prints, say. Colour in one pile and monochrome in another to make comparison between them easier. The question at this point would be what would you be comparing?

Subject, most definitely. Definition and acutance, possibly. Focus and hyperfocal distance, yes. Style, probably depending on the photographer you might pick out similarities. We could go down the list.

In most cases I can think of, the camera format size would be the defining difference between cameras' "look" all things considered. Small formats have a look that large format cameras cannot compare or imitate with and vice-versa.

When I compare a sub-miniature shots from a Tessina or a Minox to a miniature Brownie or an instamatic to a small Nikon or a Canon to a medium Mamiya or Hasselblad to a large Zone VI or a Linhoff there is a distinct difference ("look") between each of these categories of Camera Format Size.

I'm not sure this actually answers the question posed; but, I had to give it a shot. I've identified the factor, I believe. An actual term eludes me other than the nebulous one usually used which is image "quality."

  • Thanks for the insight @Stan ... The electronics used and optical components used would make a difference in a camera... If I were to design a camera, then I would have to choose parts wisely – Vibhu May 5 at 16:14
  • @Vibhu xiota gave me an idea for an answer which is the definitive technical difference between any two imaging systems - called the MTF (Modulation Transfer Function). It has little to do with visual evaluation so it may be off topic insofar as "Photography." Few non-technical people even know what it is. – Stan May 5 at 16:47
2

Perhaps je ne sais quoi is the phrase you're looking for.

... is there a technical term that is used for denoting this aspect, which basically denotes the nature of photos a particular camera or lens takes?

There is no technical term for something as vague and broad as "nature". Technical terms tend to be precise. They can often be described in mathematical notation.

  • Thanks for the answer.. I'm relatively new to the theory and relate to music mostly... There color of sound is a great concept... For me. – Vibhu May 5 at 16:26
  • Technical terms related to music and sound are often described mathematically. That is what makes audio compression possible. – xiota May 5 at 16:29
  • @xiota This also applies 100% to imaging. This is what makes digital imaging possible. Both can be put into the realm of physics. : ) – Stan May 5 at 16:39
  • Beautiful description ... Je ne sais quoi – Vibhu May 17 at 14:24
0

YES.

The definitive technical difference between any two imaging systems - is called the MTF (Modulation Transfer Function). That's how imaging systems are compared for fidelity of reproduction among other things.

It has little to do with visual evaluation so it may be off topic insofar as "Photography."

Few non-technical people even know what it is.

Here is a brief introduction for the beginner including the formula to generate the result mathematically. Modulation Transfer Function - York University

  • Brilliant. Thanks for hooking me up to this term – Vibhu May 5 at 17:03
  • I'm unable to vote, I need 15 points before any of that action happens – Vibhu May 5 at 17:18
  • @Vibhu In that case, let me get you started. – Stan May 5 at 17:27
  • Many thanks.... – Vibhu May 5 at 18:01

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.