...About "Faithful representation" in photography...
I often use this example as a simplification of "no such thing as correct".
Take this bust in a room with pure, deep blue light. You take a picture of it.
If you were to "white balance" it, after some additional corrections, you would end up with image B.
Now, what's the intent? Did you mean to depict how strong the blue light was in that room, or that the bust was made of beautiful white marble?
Which is "correct"?
RE: https://wandering.shop/@Catvalente/116375945485000722
I’ve said this hundreds of times, and this comment is spot on; this willing anthropomorphic term is a psychological operation by the purveyors of the Assembled Statistical Sequencing software to change the narrative.
I’m old enough to remember when we’d just call the error shitty software. A bug.
Earth and moon and some bizarre depth stuffs.
https://science.nasa.gov/resource/from-a-million-miles-away-moon-crossing-face-of-earth/
This is a pretty amazing Phasor diagram that I believe could be used to visualize the interrelated energies of Luminance to Chrominance.