On 9/29/2021 9:39 PM, Moose wrote:
On 9/29/2021 7:37 AM, Jan Steinman wrote:
I prefer an old, beat-up skylight or UV filter. Then stick your finger in your ear, and rub earwax on the filter to
get the effect you want. Depending on your age, complexion, diet, and desired effect, oil from the side of your nose
may work well, too!
I had hoped to be specific enough to avoid this. Vaseline, nose grease, pantyhose, and so on and on and on . . . are
perfectly valid ways to soften images. <. . .>
The various blur options in editors are also perfectly valid ways to soften
images.
Howsomever — to get "the kind of not hard, but highly detailed image common in old LF photos" that I spoke of, they
don't work at all.
None of the many old FF, manual Focus lenses I have can do the combination of deep DoF with low edge contrast, but
good detail, of many old LF lenses. The Canon and Minolta soft focus models come closest.
Disclaimer: I am illustrating, not advocating.
Here's an example that I hope makes my point.
<http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/tech/Lenses/Nikon%20Soft%20Focus/NikSoft1.htm>
Note how a "bad" lens does strange/interesting things; the foliage upper left,
in particular.
The soft filtered F16 has clearer focal plane detail than the unfiltered F1.2.
The clear tonic bottle is very similar in both filtered shots.
Simple point, there's a look, which can be attractive, that combines edge softness with quite a bit of detail, and deep
DoF — and can't be done with any FF lens I know of alone.
Illustrated Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|