I do agree with Athiril. But I don't understand where inauthenticity comes in. It might come in, I really just don't understand. Isn't the very nature of digital imitation? Everything is 1s and 0s, right, and we write programs to dictate what that turns into. The normal output from digital cameras isn't "authentic digital", its just what we wrote the program to do. So why not change factors later to look like what you want it to look like? And if you like a filmy look, that makes sense. We've been perfecting it for a while.
Originally Posted by thegman