I think most lenses are too sharp for a portrait... at least for the
skin. I routinely soften skin if it doesn't otherwise get softened in
retouching blemishes. Also, the skin doesn't get sharpened along with
the rest of the print. In fact, most of the print doesn't get
sharpened, only the eyes, brows, lips, nostrils perhaps and jewelry. If
the background stands out too much it might also get the opposite
treatment with a bit of blur thrown in.
I have a fairly thick photo book called "Skin" by Lee Varis which I've
been intending to read for the past year. So far I think I've only read
two chapters. Seems to have some promise but I keep forgetting to pick
it up again. I just went and located it and put it in a place where I'm
more likely to remember and pick it up again.
ps: Although I do clean up blemishes and do soften the skin and
wrinkles a bit I am not of the plastic skin persuasion. Yecchh!
Chuck Norcutt
On 5/23/2011 11:49 AM, Ken Norton wrote:
>
> Went to a graduation party for a relative who I did the senior pictures for.
> It was fascinating seeing the large prints in actual presentation, framed,
> matted and hung. Some pretty good stuff. The bulk of these pictures were
> taken with the Panasonic DMC-L1 with the Leica 14-50. I know it's got to be
> just me, but is anybody else bothered when they see a print which is biting
> sharp? I think, especially when it comes to portraiture, that you can have
> too much detail. That camera-lens combination just seemed a little edgy to
> me. Regardless, everybody said good things about the shots and I think I got
> two more customers out of the deal.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|