Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: Sharpness, sometimes a disadvantage  (Read 1797 times)

Telecaster

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3690
Re: Sharpness, sometimes a disadvantage
« Reply #20 on: March 29, 2019, 04:37:37 pm »

I'm sure I've posted this here before. And it only qualifies as "street" if you're a dinosaur descendent.  ;)

-Dave-
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22711
Re: Sharpness, sometimes a disadvantage
« Reply #21 on: March 29, 2019, 04:47:16 pm »

O thatís a nice shot, Rob.

She was a nice girl, too. Wife of a guy who spent a lot of time out on the oil rigs... She had an Alsatian that was with her everywhere, at her side, and I don't think he was ever on a leash.

I remember meeting her one day in a shop and doing the air-kiss number, only to realise the pooch might not have understood. She had no interest in modelling at all, sadly, and only did the poster and brochure cover because they were friends of the guy who owned the company. She pretty much spent all day down on the sands every day of summer. They went their separate ways, and the client lost it to big C.

Everything changes.

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22711
Re: Sharpness, sometimes a disadvantage
« Reply #22 on: March 29, 2019, 04:53:27 pm »

This book comes from Ken Van Sickle, an octogenarian New York photographer i posted about in the past. There is a short, three-minute video about him, with his pearls of photographic wisdom:

https://www.facebook.com/newshour/videos/10153876052678675/

And for those without a FB account:

https://youtu.be/hA_uVCCD5Is

Or about always carrying a camera:


Thank you for the link, Slobodan. I enjoyed it and wished it had been longer. The first link has a cool shot of his first wife looking down at the newspaper sits. vacs. and really does get into the spirit of home. It is not in the second link for some reason.

Rob

KLaban

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1838
Re: Sharpness, sometimes a disadvantage
« Reply #23 on: March 29, 2019, 05:32:57 pm »

Another with a bit of both.



Grandmother and child, Jodhpur.
Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17778
  • http://myrvaagnes.com
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: Sharpness, sometimes a disadvantage
« Reply #24 on: March 29, 2019, 08:07:44 pm »

Just right, to me.
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes (visit my website: http://myrvaagnes.com)

Two23

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 789
Re: Sharpness, sometimes a disadvantage
« Reply #25 on: March 29, 2019, 10:26:40 pm »

A big part of the reason I still often shoot vintage equipment is to get that classic look.  I've just finished up processing x8 sheets of Ilford FP4+; they hanging up to dry as I type.  I simply select whatever camera gear will give me the look AND experience I want.  Wife & I are headed back to Washington state next month, this time to visit the southeast corner in addition to spending a day or so around downtown Seattle.  For the fields of flowers and landscapes I'll use my Nikon DSLR to shoot color.  For exploring the streets of the city I'll be using my newly restored 1931 Baby Rolleiflex with ISO 400 b&w film. :)

I did like Van Sickle's photos.  I particularly liked the way he caught people's expressions, which are always fleeting. 


Kent in SD
Logged
Qui sedes ad dexteram Patris,
miserere nobis.

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22711
Re: Sharpness, sometimes a disadvantage
« Reply #26 on: March 31, 2019, 04:43:09 pm »

I was wondering what more sharpness would have contributed to these pictures, and whether it would actually have ruined the atmosphere and handwriting they display.

Of course, looking at prints and looking at what happens after somebody other than the photographer takes images and bends them to his/her video isn't all that helpful, I suppose.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4JiUyuKWHL0

Of course, not "street" per se, but as this was raised here, it may be of interest nonetheless.

LesPalenik

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 2582
    • advantica blog
Re: Sharpness, sometimes a disadvantage
« Reply #27 on: March 31, 2019, 06:33:27 pm »

Sharpness is seriously overrated.



Sometimes.

If this is an OOF photo of a Sunny Side Up egg, I would say it's been cooked too long. I like it best when it is fried quicker, then it looks more yellow than orange.
Still there is something very appetizing about this picture.

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22711
Re: Sharpness, sometimes a disadvantage
« Reply #28 on: April 02, 2019, 04:34:27 pm »

Blur is a fact of life.

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17778
  • http://myrvaagnes.com
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: Sharpness, sometimes a disadvantage
« Reply #29 on: April 02, 2019, 05:45:22 pm »

Blur is a fact of life.
Yes, that's pretty much the way I see things these days.   :'(
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes (visit my website: http://myrvaagnes.com)

faberryman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 1189
Re: Sharpness, sometimes a disadvantage
« Reply #30 on: April 02, 2019, 06:06:13 pm »

Yes, that's pretty much the way I see things these days.   :'(
i still have good vision without impairment so everything is sharp for me.

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5584
    • Flicker photos
Re: Sharpness, sometimes a disadvantage
« Reply #31 on: April 02, 2019, 08:00:04 pm »

Interestly, digital tends to sharpen details much more than film.  I think that's a negative especially with street. 

rabanito

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1000
Re: Sharpness, sometimes a disadvantage
« Reply #32 on: April 03, 2019, 03:40:09 am »

i still have good vision without impairment so everything is sharp for me.

Interesting.
I only see sharp with the fovea centralis. The rest is unsharp
Logged

KLaban

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1838
Re: Sharpness, sometimes a disadvantage
« Reply #33 on: April 03, 2019, 11:58:26 am »

Interesting.
I only see sharp with the fovea centralis. The rest is unsharp

My understanding* is I'm experiencing quite the opposite. Macular degeneration is robbing me of sharp vision within my fovea centralis. Scary stuff.

*My understanding may well be as flawed as my eyesight.
Logged

rabanito

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1000
Re: Sharpness, sometimes a disadvantage
« Reply #34 on: April 03, 2019, 01:11:53 pm »

My understanding* is I'm experiencing quite the opposite. Macular degeneration is robbing me of sharp vision within my fovea centralis. Scary stuff.

*My understanding may well be as flawed as my eyesight.
Sorry about that.
The quality of your photography would seem to indicate otherwise
Logged

KLaban

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1838
Re: Sharpness, sometimes a disadvantage
« Reply #35 on: April 03, 2019, 01:30:55 pm »

Sorry about that.
The quality of your photography would seem to indicate otherwise

Thanks.

Fortunately the problem is for the moment at least only in one eye - cataract forming in the other - and its progress is slow. What all this does mean is I'm having to seriously consider switching from manual rangefinder cameras to autofocus solutions.
Logged

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 13195
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: Sharpness, sometimes a disadvantage
« Reply #36 on: April 03, 2019, 03:10:50 pm »

Autofocus has improved immeasurably, Keith. When Leica first switched to digital I desperately wanted a digital Leica with my good old split-image rangefinder, but the stuff Leica was putting out was full of bugs, so I went to Nikon. Finally, I tried the Olympus Pen-F as a street camera. It feels a lot like the M-4 in my hand, and the autofocus is almost instantaneous. Now I wouldn't go back to a split-image on a bet.

I'm really sorry to hear about your eyesight problems. I've had cataract surgery in both eyes, with complete success, so I know that nowadays that's not too big a problem, but macular degeneration is a different story. You've definitely "got the eye," and I very much hope you'll keep it.

imagetone

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 93
    • http://www.tonymayimages.com
Re: Sharpness, sometimes a disadvantage
« Reply #37 on: April 03, 2019, 03:21:33 pm »

There must be no end of beautiful examples but I was reminded of White Heat by Bob Carlos Clarke. As a big admirer of his B&W work I'm lucky that my wife bought me the book. I think the lack of clinical sharpness and the movement is essential for some of these.

Some of them here:
www.thelittleblackgallery.com/product-category/bob-carlos-clarke-marco-pierre-white/

I was lucky enough to be asked to photograph in the kitchen of one of my clients a few years ago and tried to pay homage as best I could. Nowhere near the class or the wildness but they and I were happy at the time. Plus his were film and mine digital. The images are small (and a couple missing) as its a post from my old blog but you get the idea.

www.tonymayimages.com/service/

Tony
Logged

KLaban

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1838
Re: Sharpness, sometimes a disadvantage
« Reply #38 on: April 03, 2019, 04:40:25 pm »

Autofocus has improved immeasurably, Keith. When Leica first switched to digital I desperately wanted a digital Leica with my good old split-image rangefinder, but the stuff Leica was putting out was full of bugs, so I went to Nikon. Finally, I tried the Olympus Pen-F as a street camera. It feels a lot like the M-4 in my hand, and the autofocus is almost instantaneous. Now I wouldn't go back to a split-image on a bet.

I'm really sorry to hear about your eyesight problems. I've had cataract surgery in both eyes, with complete success, so I know that nowadays that's not too big a problem, but macular degeneration is a different story. You've definitely "got the eye," and I very much hope you'll keep it.

Russ, thanks. I'm sad that it's coming to this as I've loved using my Leicas, have admired the pure simplicity and what was the ease of focusing those exceptional lenses. I believe that I've captured much of my best work with them in hand. My problems are accentuated now that I'm more often than not shooting near wide open and I have come to terms with the fact that I need some help.

I'll not burn my bridges until I'm sure any new system matches my ongoing needs.
« Last Edit: April 04, 2019, 03:39:10 am by KLaban »
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22711
Re: Sharpness, sometimes a disadvantage
« Reply #39 on: April 04, 2019, 06:17:15 am »

Russ, thanks. I'm sad that it's coming to this as I've loved using my Leicas, have admired the pure simplicity and what was the ease of focusing those exceptional lenses. I believe that I've captured much of my best work with them in hand. My problems are accentuated now that I'm more often than not shooting near wide open and I have come to terms with the fact that I need some help.

I'll not burn my bridges until I'm sure any new system matches my ongoing needs.

I have cataracts in both eyes, and am awaiting attention from the medical world. I had elevated pressure in both for several years, and drops have apparently reduced that to normal. There are days, no, moments within days, when I believe that without those damn veils that exist, I would no longer need glasses for distances. None of the effects that I experience seem to be constants, each varies a bit from hour to hoiur. I used to need reading specs from the age of 44, but had good distance sight; I now have no need for glasses for reading, and it's the distance view that's bad. Oddly, driving in lower light seems better than in bright, which may mean that glare affects cataracts more (one way of knowing you have 'em!) than does low light or, perhaps, a wide open pupil works better than the stopped down one in sunlight - more diffraction problems?

For a few years I was under the impression that I had glaucome, until I was sent to another eye doc who asked me who had said glaucoma, which I have not. Apparently, the explanation seems to be that some docs refer to high pessure as glaucomea because both seem to co-exist in most cases; I see that as Brexit politics: lies and party cover-ups.

Af certainly helps find focus using dslr screens which are not as helpful as were slr screens. With today's facilities for setting exactly the right diopter in your viewfinder, a split-image screen would be even more useful than it was on film camers where the option was usually another, separate diopter lens to choose, and how did you do that if not able to try 'em out in a shop?

Of course, that all assumes that your eye lets you see that damned split screen clearly, even with the right viewfinder setting.

In the end, however  focus, I still feel that psychologically, and that matters, looking into a 6x6 camera's reflex screen was the best viewing experience I ever had: large enough to see more clearly what was actually in shot, yet small enough to allow an impression of overall shape.

Rob
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up