Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => User Critiques => Topic started by: Slobodan Blagojevic on August 28, 2012, 01:55:06 pm
-
Taken through a window glass, at 6400 ISO, 1/10s, f/4 (Canon 60D with 70-200/4 L IS), using a monopod.
(http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8444/7881569394_f4397376f7.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/slobodan_blagojevic/7881569394/)
New York Dusk (http://www.flickr.com/photos/slobodan_blagojevic/7881569394/) by Slobodan Blagojevic (http://www.flickr.com/people/slobodan_blagojevic/), on Flickr
-
Very nice, Slobodan, a little soft because of the glass, but "sharpness" is a novice's fixation.
-
Russ, I provided technical details (which is not something I often do) to indicate that almost everything was conspiring agains sharpness: shooting through (thick) glass at an angle, high ISO, fully open aperture, low speed, monopod (instead of a tripod). Some sharpness was also gone with noise reduction (in LR4). I was surprised it is as sharp as it is. The only thing working for it was in-lens image stabilization.
-
Why does it need to be sharper. It is a successful capture of a rather beautiful moment rather than a catalogue picture of an architect's phallus (or group[ of same).
Cheers,
W
-
Exactly!!
Mike.
-
I think all four of us agree on sharpness.
However, we wouldn't be card-carrying forum members without at least a bit of an obsession with sharpness ;) ;D
Thus I am including a before & after comparison at !00% (the after includes all other adjustments, not just Detail tab). I think LR4 did an admirable job in preserving detail, in spite of a rather aggressive (75) noise reduction:
-
I am not sure that I don't prefer the BEFORE version. I never found grain objectionable (strange for a large format fan) and I seem to think the same of noise.
Cheers,
-
I think all four of us agree on sharpness.
However, we wouldn't be card-carrying forum members without at least a bit of an obsession with sharpness ;) ;D
Thus I am including a before & after comparison at !00% (the after includes all other adjustments, not just Detail tab). I think LR4 did an admirable job in preserving detail, in spite of rather aggressive (75) noise reduction:
Now I am really quite impressed with that NR, I knew there must be something in LR4 that I needed and that might well be it - thanks for posting ;D
Dave
-
Well, I'm too old to use the term "awesome," so I'll just say, fine work Slobodan.
-
Great image, I like the contrast between the smooth sky and the geometric/angular shapes of the skyscrapers…
-
Now I am really quite impressed with that NR, I knew there must be something in LR4 that I needed and that might well be it - thanks for posting ;D
Dave
I use the same sharpening tools are in the RAW editor. I will sometimes use this in my work flow prior to doing any further adjustments in Photoshop and do my final sharpening later in the process. Of course, I've never gotten the hang of LR so that has to be my new quest in my "retired" stage. Boy, I love not going to work.
-
I think all four of us agree on sharpness.
However, we wouldn't be card-carrying forum members without at least a bit of an obsession with sharpness ;) ;D
Thus I am including a before & after comparison at !00% (the after includes all other adjustments, not just Detail tab). I think LR4 did an admirable job in preserving detail, in spite of rather aggressive (75) noise reduction:
This is a revelation for me, I really have to sit down and learn how to properly work on my photos, sharpening and noise reduction being a very good start.
-
"sharpness" is a novice's fixation.
I don't know how in the world you can say that. I totally do not understand that comment.
-
I don't know how in the world you can say that. I totally do not understand that comment.
+1
Sharpness is always good, except when you want something soft. It is rare that an image shouldn't have a sharp element. It happens, but it is rare.
-
I use the same sharpening tools are in the RAW editor. I will sometimes use this in my work flow prior to doing any further adjustments in Photoshop and do my final sharpening later in the process. Of course, I've never gotten the hang of LR so that has to be my new quest in my "retired" stage. Boy, I love not going to work.
That's kind of sad; I wish like hell that I could go back to work!
;-)
Rob C
-
I don't know how in the world you can say that. I totally do not understand that comment.
People obsessed with sharpness usually produce images whose only redeeming quality is... sharpness. You know, the classical Ansel Adams quote: "Nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept."
-
I don't know how in the world you can say that. I totally do not understand that comment.
Hi Walt, I can say that because it's true. I'd guess you're an equipment guy rather than a photograph guy. If you want to see some serious discussions about sharpness go to the Nikonians site where we learn all about bodies and lenses and how sharp they can be. Most of these guys don't actually make pictures; they mess around with equipment, getting more and more sharpness. That's okay, but it doesn't have much to do with making good photographs.
Slobodan said it all in his statement above this one.
-
That's kind of sad; I wish like hell that I could go back to work!
;-)
Rob C
You didn't teach high school in an American public school...where the kids have more liberty, rights and priviledges than the teachers...gee, let's not hurt their feelings, ya know. Pffffftttttttttt!
-
Slobodon, I'm familiar with AA quote. I do think he spent a lot of time in achieving critical sharpness in the images. I just picked up Ellitt Porters book (old) on Iceland. Very sharp AND beautifully captured.
Russ, No I'm not an equipment guy, but having spent most of my career in comercial photographyt, sharpness was Very important. Spending much time with loupe on groundglass swinging and tilting and stopping down till the image was sharp.
I agree that sharpness is not everything, but it is very important, and in no way only a fixation of novices.
-
You didn't teach high school in an American public school...where the kids have more liberty, rights and priviledges than the teachers...gee, let's not hurt their feelings, ya know. Pffffftttttttttt!
Chris, that's the British way; but then, don't we always end up swallowing the message from out west? Look at radical feminists: ruined life for many an otherwise happy girl with all those bizarre notions of changing the ways of Mother Nature... Not to mention what the madness did for pin-up snappers and their models, of course.
Perhaps a fitting summation came from a neighbour who, now approaching 70, remarked that there was a time when if your bum didn't get smacked in the office, and if nobody tried to date you, you felt you were slipping... Nowadays, it appears that even asking a student out can be construed as sexual harassment... of course, if I were to ask one out, it probably would be, but only after everyone had collapsed on the floor laughing.
Such is Life, such is progress.
Rob C
-
So then, for an image to work you pick two of the three: sharpness, blurriness, strong concept.
Wait...didn't HCB state that sharpness is a bourgeois concept?
How do we factor this into the equation?
-
So then, for an image to work you pick two of the three: sharpness, blurriness, strong concept.
Wait...didn't HCB state that sharpness is a bourgeois concept?
How do we factor this into the equation?
First, we have to accept that your set of parameters doesn't apply.
Then, thinking about HC-B, we also have to realise that because he was an excellent snapper with a drawing/painting background, it didn't bestow upon him any superhuman qualities that made his every utterance worth recording or swallowing without the minimum recommended dose of sodium chloride, sea or otherwise. Also, we must consider whether his affluent background was bourgeoise or über bourgeoise - I think it tended to the latter - in which case you have to factor in his very own interpretation or concept of what that delightful state actually represented at the time. I suspect he wasn't very crisp in his evaluation, assuming he ever made such an evaluation. which I can't, of course, guarantee, neither one way nor the other.
Fascinating, photography.
Rob C
-
My words were merely playing with the precious comments in the thread. Perhaps not as playfully as I intended. ::)
I think his sharpness quote was meant to be taken lightheartedly, but someone more knowledgeable on HCB could provide more clarity.
In any case, sharpness is easy part of taking photos in relation to developing a solid concept.
A quote from a forum where a Newsweek article was rewritten:
From Newsweek:
It was Newsweek's radical idea to have Helmut Newton, known for his erotic and extremely composed photographs, shoot a portrait of Cartier-Bresson, master of the wholly natural Decisive Moment. Cartier-Bresson loathes having his picture taken, and when he must, he insists the photographer be a member of Magnum, the cooperative he cofounded half a century ago. Newton is not.
Yet they met up in Paris last week for the shoot. "He looked good, very good,? says Newton, 83. ?He did everything I wanted, and was so sweet. I shot two rolls in color because he has very beautiful blue eyes, and four of black-and-white, because, being Cartier-Bresson, it has to be black-and-white.? Though their approaches are so different, Newton has long admired Cartier-Bresson. ?His pictures are about truth,? Newton says. ?Real people, like the picnic by the Marne. I like that one best.? They first encountered each other 25 or 30 years ago, in a Paris cafe. ?I felt he turned his nose up at me,? Newton recalls. A few years later Newton said in a television interview that, although he loved Cartier-Bresson?s work, he believed the feelings were not mutual. Soon after, Newton received a postcard from Cartier-Bresson. It read: ?I like you very much.?
Newton finally saw Cartier-Bresson again last year, when Vanity Fair asked Cartier-Bresson to shoot a portrait of Newton for a portfolio by photographers older than 80. Cartier-Bresson invited Newton and his wife, June (known by her nom de camera, Alice Springs), for lunch at his flat in the rue de Rivoli. Then they walked to a nearby park to take the picture. ?He had his little Leica,? Newton remembers, ?and he simply would point and shoot.? Since Cartier-Bresson?s hand isn?t as steady as it used to be, some of the pictures were a bit fuzzy. ?Sharpness is a bourgeois concept,? he told Newton. Newton sits back and laughs: ?I thought that was just divine.?
-
There are a vast amount of highly skilled photographers, past and present, that have worked long and hard to produce very sharp images of well thought out subjects. Do I think every image must be tact sharp to be successful? Absolutely not. There are times when softness or blur add a tremendous amount to the photograph. And I thought Slobodons image was very nice.
But for Russ to say( "sharpness" is a novice's fixation.) is flat out wrong no matter how much he states it or believes it.
-
Been away for a few days.
Back to the original post: Lovely image of great aesthetic value.
Regards
Tony Jay
-
There are a vast amount of highly skilled photographers, past and present, that have worked long and hard to produce very sharp images of well thought out subjects. Do I think every image must be tact sharp to be successful? Absolutely not. There are times when softness or blur add a tremendous amount to the photograph. And I thought Slobodons image was very nice.
But for Russ to say( "sharpness" is a novice's fixation.) is flat out wrong no matter how much he states it or believes it.
Well, I don't think so.
I remember two things from being a novice: make something sharp; make something with little or no grain at whole-plate (6.5 x 8.5 ins). That was where our sophistication (none) led us to think success was to be found.
Of course sharpness is critical in many, many situations; that's not being challenged, as far as I can see, but for other than technical product stuff, it isn't always a priority. In fact, for amateur or artistic work, it comes rather low in the hierarchy of tokens of success, where I'd put mood to be the top one: get that and the amateur world's at your feet. Or it should be...
Rob C