Sharpness . . . Lens quality versus software postprocessing
Dec 19, 2017 12:36:12 #
Mine was a real test. I shot it in 2004 with a Fuji S2. Revived it about 15 minutes ago.
bcrawf wrote:
Fotoartist's example was pretty fair, but look at these to see what post-processing can do:
Dec 19, 2017 12:38:50 #
The mediocre lenses of today are capable of very good results. Purchase the best glass that you can afford, then work on your vision and technique. Technology will never replace personal vision and skill.
Dec 19, 2017 12:40:41 #
Fotoartist wrote:
Incidentally, no halos in the above shot revived in post.
There are many halos in the image on the right. Look at the edge of her cheek on the left. There are halos in the hair on the right side, around at least two spots on her lips. Both eyes have halos on most though not all eyebrows and eyelashes.
That image only works if it is displayed very small at thumbnail size.
Dec 19, 2017 12:45:12 #
Dec 19, 2017 12:47:39 #
There are no short cuts to good glass, the glass is more important than the body... As other have mentioned here, you get what you pay for!
Dec 19, 2017 12:48:29 #
Apaflo wrote:
There are many halos in the image on the right. Look at the edge of her cheek on the left. There are halos in the hair on the right side, around at least two spots on her lips. Both eyes have halos on most though not all eyebrows and eyelashes.
That image only works if it is displayed very small at thumbnail size.
That image only works if it is displayed very small at thumbnail size.
Actually I think it would work for headshots. I do not think the printing process for headshots would not show these problems.
Dec 19, 2017 12:51:41 #
Mac wrote:
Do you mean like snapping a shot, replacing the sky, replacing the background, replacing the foreground, turning it in to a collage and calling it a photograph?
Why do you guys always associate wanting to be good at post processing with replacing stuff in a photo?
And why is it also, that every one of these type of demeaning replies come from people who are simply snapshot shooters? If you are going to judge someone on their ability to create something that most of us are not skilled enough to do, at least produce quality work. Because looking at the few photos you had posted here, you are not doing any favors for your beliefs. Although to be fair to you, post processing is the least of your issues.
Just because you shoot jpegs and do no processing, doesn’t mean that those who do are wrong.
The idea is to produce photos that you and others enjoy. How it was done should not matter.
Is it envy?
Dec 19, 2017 12:54:20 #
dsmeltz wrote:
Actually I think it would work for headshots. I do not think the printing process for headshots would not show these problems.
It would look harsh and over processed to anyone used to high quality prints. For example no magazine art director would even look twice.
Dec 19, 2017 12:57:24 #
Fotoartist wrote:
I see the halo on the cheek on the left. But that's it!
He is nitpicking because he is envious. He could never do that.
I think what you did is amazing, but let me ask you this? Why was the shot so soft to begin with?
Dec 19, 2017 12:58:13 #
tdekany wrote:
... The idea is to produce photos that you and others enjoy. How it was done should not matter. ...
How it is done is exactly what matters to those who want to learn.
Dec 19, 2017 13:01:53 #
Apaflo wrote:
It would look harsh and over processed to anyone used to high quality prints. For example no magazine art director would even look twice.
Looked at it again. Now it bugs me. But the ability of the program is still impressive.
Dec 19, 2017 13:02:39 #
Apaflo wrote:
It would look harsh and over processed to anyone used to high quality prints. For example no magazine art director would even look twice.
Oh please!!!! Give it a rest already. Was this pictures taken in 2004 to get it on the cover of a magazine?
Still a hundred times better than what you can produce. You should worry about your own lack of skills before you start pointing fingers at others.
And while we are at it, how many pictures have you produced that even made it to a magazine or art director’s desk?
Dec 19, 2017 13:05:13 #
Apaflo wrote:
How it is done is exactly what matters to those who want to learn.
Dude! “HOW” it was done should not be criticized if the final product is good. Wake up and get with the program.
Dec 19, 2017 13:06:39 #
tdekany wrote:
... And while we are at it, how many pictures have you produced that even made it to a magazine or art director’s desk?
Dozens that were published.
And I made a nice living selling large prints.
Dec 19, 2017 13:06:53 #
Apaflo wrote:
How it is done is exactly what matters to those who want to learn.
Mac is obviously not one of those who want to learn.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.