>>I prefer sharp, constrasty lenses since it easier to degrade
>>these qualities later than improve them.
>On this I agree. It's far easier to degrade contrast with a
>fog or one of several types of soft-focus filters than it is
>to magically add it back.
Maybe, maybe not. I can spot a soft-focus or fog filter ten
miles away. There is a marked difference between an
"augemented" image (either through a mechanical filter or
through Photoshop manipulation) and the characteristics of a
"smooth" lens.
A "smooth" lens has the unique characteristic of being
exceptionally sharp (prerequisite) and yet possessing the
smoothing characteristics necessary to eliminate and control
harshness. Bokeh, contrast, flare and aberations all play into
this equation.
On the subject of Bokeh... No amount of fogging or image
manipulation will correct an image that has gut-wrenching bokeh.
Many of the new lens designs (obviously other manufacturers)
render out-of-focus highlights as donuts. And these are NOT cat
lenses, but wide-angles, zooms, etc.
AG-Schnozz
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|