Too much definition?

[Rob C]

I am inclined to think that the cliche of demonstrating any new photographic tool with portraits is ill-advised in the modern high-resolution realm; better to let the reviewers get outside and photograph something with fine details more interesting than pores in the face and veins in the eyes.

(I’m also tempted to call these images “pore-traits”.)

You've made a good point, there.

Rob

[KLaban]

I am inclined to think that the cliche of demonstrating any new photographic tool with portraits is ill-advised in the modern high-resolution realm; better to let the reviewers get outside and photograph something with fine details more interesting than pores in the face and veins in the eyes.

(I’m also tempted to call these images “pore-traits”.)

Much depends on the face.



;-)

[Rob C]

Much depends on the face.



;-)

That's great framing!

Yeah, hi-fi suits this subject well. One of those faces that could substitute for the traditional brick wall in more esoteric lens testing, too.

;-)

Rob

[KLaban]

Rob, thanks.

I remember seeing some head shot close-ups of a beautiful female model with heavily painted face used on Hasselblad promotions. They were quite stunning and certainly showed the level of detail possible with those high res digital backs.

[Rob C]

I remember my old Rollei T tlr had a Tessar lens, and when I bought the 'blad with its Planar, I noticed quite a difference using the very same standard film/soup combination.

The Tessar had a kind of glow to it, a plasticity that was very forgiving on human subjects, whereas the Planar cut like a knife. Pity that I hadn't kept the Rollei too, but trading up was essential on the budget.

Rob

[petermfiore]

I set everything to as little camera intervention as possible,  a softer look allows the picture to come through rather than be subverted by the minute details within that distract; is anyone in love with pimples or traces of dandruff?
Rob

"The picture comes through". This is all important. We see with our eyes but great pictures are about being felt, that is the bottom line.

Peter

[RSL]

Exactly, Peter!

[Paulo Bizarro]

There are "high resolution" systems, and "lower resolution systems". There used to be "fine grain" and "coarse grain" film.

It is up to the client to decide what they want.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

"The picture comes through". This is all important. We see with our eyes but great pictures are about being felt, that is the bottom line.

Peter

Amen, Peter!

[John Camp]

In painting, I am not a fan of rendering for the sake of itself. It's often thought of as high art and it's not. Many think the highest compliment is "Look at the painting, It looks just like a picture".

I wanna scream and often do so...

Peter

Yup.

[petermfiore]

There are "high resolution" systems, and "lower resolution systems". There used to be "fine grain" and "coarse grain" film.

It is up to the client to decide what they want.

If your a pro, yes. It's satisfying your client. If it's yourself to please....? Now comes a different thinking.

Peter

[kers]

Much depends on the face.



;-)

Is this man saying:

Please no Photo?

[KLaban]

Is this man saying:

Please no Photo?

No, quite the opposite, it seems to be typical of a sadhu's welcoming gesture or gesture of peace.



Perhaps there is someone here who could give a more definitive description?

[KLaban]

Which seems to come quite naturally, even to young children.

[Rob C]

Which seems to come quite naturally, even to young children.

That's one lovely catch!

What a face speaking volumes.

Rob

[RSL]

+1

[KLaban]

Thanks guys.

He was a star, sometimes you just get lucky.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Some sharpness:

https://loff.it/rodar/barcos/super-sport-65-el-nuevo-yate-de-rossinavi-y-pininfarina-se-presenta-en-fort-lauderdale-340516/

Click on the Super 65 gallery.

These look like CGI (computer generated images), not photographs.

[Martin Kristiansen]

These look like CGI (computer generated images), not photographs.

Sure do look like CGI. Could be simply retouched to death I suppose. The problem with retouching is just because you can doesn’t mean you should. If only there was a good taste slider.

[petermfiore]

Sure do look like CGI. Could be simply retouched to death I suppose. The problem with retouching is just because you can doesn’t mean you should. If only there was a good taste slider.

I agree and it's the way I feel about much of HDR...

Peter