I prefer "sharper" or "sharper yet" while leaning toward "sharper".
I didn't like any of the shallower DOF versions and it took a bit of
time to realize that the reason was my personal dislike of OOF
foregrounds. It might be a different story if focus falloff was limited
to the back half of the flower.
Chuck Norcutt
On 5/11/2012 6:01 PM, Moose wrote:
> On 5/10/2012 3:01 PM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
>> I keep staring at it wanting it to sharpen up. I think it needs to be
>> either sharper or blurrier... either make it a photograph or else make
>> it clear that it's not.
>
> Although I've been playing with altering the focal qualities of some images,
> this one is almost straight from the
> camera, no sharpening, deconvolution or blurring at all. Only Levels to pull
> up the slightly underexposed top. It's
> interesting to have a lens that gives a clear focal plane, but not terribly
> sharp.
>
> Deconvolution doesn't do much useful full size, but works very nicely on the
> web size. So here's your choices of both
> amount of sharpness and
> DOF.<http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/MPhotos/Home/SunSprite/_MG_6613.htm>
> :-)
>
> Alternatives Moose
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|