Sharpness Over Emphasized?
Sep 22, 2015 04:25:38 #
Seems like sharpness carries a lot of weight for an image to most people. Do you really need all of the sharpness for portraits? What if a subject has lots or wrinkles and skin imperfections? What about shot composition? What about exposure and lighting? What about being able to sharpen in PP? What about out of focus? You can't fix "out of focus" in PP.
To me sharpness is just one element of many for producing nice images. IMO, there should be more emphasis on composition.
When I hear this lens is sharper than this lens, I'm thinking sharpness doesn't mean much if there's bad composition, bad exposure, bad focus, too much noise, etc. I've come to the conclusion Sharpness in over emphasized.
To me sharpness is just one element of many for producing nice images. IMO, there should be more emphasis on composition.
When I hear this lens is sharper than this lens, I'm thinking sharpness doesn't mean much if there's bad composition, bad exposure, bad focus, too much noise, etc. I've come to the conclusion Sharpness in over emphasized.
Sep 22, 2015 04:35:09 #
I agree, sharpness is one of the many variables that makes an image. I feel composition is by far the hardest of all variables to "nail".
A lens sharpness comment, to me, means that the lens is capable of extreme sharpness. All of the variables combined contribute to the overall image.
A lens sharpness comment, to me, means that the lens is capable of extreme sharpness. All of the variables combined contribute to the overall image.
Sep 22, 2015 04:51:59 #
Pablo8
Loc: Nottingham UK.
Lens manufacturers could not advertise a lens as being able to achieve ideal composition, or many other ingredients that combine to make a good picture. And who is to say what is a 'good' picture? A 'Photographer' knows how to use/control sharpness. But it needs to be available in the first place.
Sep 22, 2015 05:56:14 #
skingfong wrote:
Seems like sharpness carries a lot of weight for a... (show quote)
You're right on all counts. I think sharpness is over-emphasized. While you don't usually want an image to be soft and blurry, it's not necessary to see the texture on the individual hairs of a cat.
People want to get the sharpest lens possible because if you start with a perfect lens, your chances of getting a decent image are increased. Shooting with a lens that isn't sharp to begin with means you're going to the plate with two strikes against you.
Yes, I definitely agree that composition is important. I like to think that composition is king. The most important part of a photograph is what it shows. If the image is no good to begin with, then color, focus, and exposure are meaningless.
Yes, you can sharpen an image in post, but some people overdo it. It's like increasing the strength of the color - in moderation. Adobe now has a feature that corrects for movement of the camera. So if an image looks like it is out of focus, it could be because the camera moved a bit, and that can be fixed.
Sep 22, 2015 05:59:22 #
I agree with jerryc41. You want to start with a sharp lens. A lot of pro photographers use the Portrait Pro software to smooth out wrinkles and skin imperfections.
Sep 22, 2015 06:22:47 #
skingfong wrote:
Seems like sharpness carries a lot of weight for a... (show quote)
A photograph is like a Thanksgiving dinner. It has many components, all of which are important. Nobody scoots back from the table and says only "Wow, that was good turkey!". They always say it was a good "dinner", which includes everything, turkey or otherwise.
Sharpness, blur, contrast, exposure, composition, lighting, timing, abstraction, color, tonality, etc. etc. are all important.
Consider a photograph in relation to Gestault Theory, which says the whole is a sum of the parts. It's the unified whole that a viewer actually perceives.
Think of it in the way Rudolf Arnhiem put it in a 1971 essay titled "Entropy and Art",
"When nothing superfluous is included and
nothing indispensable left out, one can
understand the interrelation of the whole and
its parts, as well as the hierarchic scale of
importance and power by which some structural
features are dominant, others subordinate."
Sharpness and blur are just compositional tools that help position structural parts on the "hierarchic scale of importance and power". It can't be over emphasized if the effect it produces is appropriate. If the effect isn't appropriate the tool isn't being used properly.
Sep 22, 2015 06:25:11 #
Sep 22, 2015 06:38:33 #
Sep 22, 2015 06:48:22 #
skingfong wrote:
Seems like sharpness carries a lot of weight for a... (show quote)
I also agree with you and have been trying to preach composition. Though do be aware of the difference between sharpness and resolution.
A soft dreamy image can at time evoke a more emotional mood. And yes, to me too much "sharpness" can hurt a portrait. In the film days high resolution films like Panatomic-X or Kodachrome 25 could produce images that looked like medical pathology photography resolving every pore, hair, and skin defect. Look at all the effort some photographer put in to softening portraits with Photoshop or Lightroom. In the old days some photographers put Vaseline on a filter to soften a shot. Some people are pixel collectors others are photographers. And a few artists.
Sep 22, 2015 08:12:09 #
The Villages
Loc: The Villages, Florida
And remember, there are a lot of pictures that are considered "Great" which were taken years ago with tools (cameras, developers etc.) that produced pictures that probably won't meet the test of today. But, they were Great because of the various aspects referenced in some of the posts being offered.
Sep 22, 2015 08:15:49 #
A month after I joined UHH, I posted a topic called "How crisp is too crisp?" It's a bit more about pp than lens quality, but still speaks to your point.
I think there are several reasons you see sharpness mentioned, including the general consumer belief that spending a lot of money is always the best course of action ("That camera takes good pictures!" ), and the lack of experience and training in photography as an art - e.g., a person needs no knowledge of composition to be able to press a shutter button.
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-85532-1.html
I think there are several reasons you see sharpness mentioned, including the general consumer belief that spending a lot of money is always the best course of action ("That camera takes good pictures!" ), and the lack of experience and training in photography as an art - e.g., a person needs no knowledge of composition to be able to press a shutter button.
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-85532-1.html
Sep 22, 2015 08:43:20 #
Apaflo makes a GREAT point.
Sharpness is a tool to be used to generate the desired effect and produce the finished product you imagined.
As a tool, sharpness is there for the craftsman to use at his or her discretion. That's all.
Remember; like any tool of the trade it is better to have it and not need it... than to need it and NOT have it. ;)
There is no such thing as too much sharpness because in the end, YOU are in charge of the finished product.
Sharpness is a tool to be used to generate the desired effect and produce the finished product you imagined.
As a tool, sharpness is there for the craftsman to use at his or her discretion. That's all.
Remember; like any tool of the trade it is better to have it and not need it... than to need it and NOT have it. ;)
There is no such thing as too much sharpness because in the end, YOU are in charge of the finished product.
Sep 22, 2015 08:46:56 #
skingfong wrote:
Seems like sharpness carries a lot of weight for a... (show quote)
Over emphasized by whom and in what context?
Sep 22, 2015 08:51:18 #
Jim Bob wrote:
Over emphasized by whom and in what context?
Hmmmm, so you need names, interesting.....
Sep 22, 2015 08:59:10 #
No... Jim Bob makes a GREAT point.
I know people who have this criticism who couldn't take a sharp image if their lives depended on it. :lol:
One because of tremors, the other because he doesn't have the technique or knowledge to achieve the effect.
So the question is valid.
I know people who have this criticism who couldn't take a sharp image if their lives depended on it. :lol:
One because of tremors, the other because he doesn't have the technique or knowledge to achieve the effect.
So the question is valid.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.