Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-27-2011, 02:23 PM   #196
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
pixie dust?

Name:  PBAG3453.jpg
Views: 281
Size:  52.9 KB

dusty?

Name:  PBAG3465-Edit.jpg
Views: 270
Size:  65.6 KB


Last edited by paperbag846; 05-27-2011 at 02:36 PM.
05-27-2011, 02:26 PM   #197
Veteran Member
TOUGEFC's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Brisbane
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,561
Not in my eyes.
05-27-2011, 05:56 PM   #198
Veteran Member
Todd Adamson's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Iowa
Posts: 722
A very quick snap from the sushi restaurant today, as it was busy, lots of foot traffic and I didn't have time to compose. It's still pretty cool, though, and it's definitely got what I think of as pixie dust. These were hanging strings of very small origami cranes, wingspans of an inch or so:

05-27-2011, 06:14 PM   #199
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,679
paperbag, #1's got something special about it in the bokeh, and that may have more to do with the nature and physical separation of the background from the point of focus than the lens itself.

Todd, your example's also interesting, and the bokeh relatively smooth, though I'd cool the image down somewhat to save some highlight detail and it may turn out a lot nicer.

05-27-2011, 06:40 PM   #200
Veteran Member
Todd Adamson's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Iowa
Posts: 722
Yeah, this version is pretty heavily processed. But the highlights in the shot are completely gone, no saving them.
05-28-2011, 12:21 PM - 1 Like   #201
Veteran Member
Todd Adamson's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Iowa
Posts: 722
Well, I still can't put this lens down, so y'all have to look at a few more of my (probably) tiresome-by-now snapshots. Third one is very PD, IMO, and the first one, though more of a classic portrait-style shot, has a little something extra. The fourth one is just there because I was a bit surprised to find that the full-field sharpness of this lens, while not awesome, is better than I would have expected for a fast tele. It is stopped down to f/3.2, though. The toad, I just liked. My wife spotted it, told me to go look, and I complied. Usually she has little concept of what might make a decent shot, so I don't always go look at whatever it is she's spotted; today, I'm glad I did. Kinda wish I woulda had the 100 Makro-Planar for this one, but it's a decent shot, nonetheless.









05-28-2011, 12:26 PM   #202
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Midwest
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,407
QuoteOriginally posted by Todd Adamson Quote
Well, I still can't put this lens down, so y'all have to look at a few more of my (probably) tiresome-by-now snapshots. Third one is very PD, IMO, and the first one, though more of a classic portrait-style shot, has a little something extra. The fourth one is just there because I was a bit surprised to find that the full-field sharpness of this lens, while not awesome, is better than I would have expected for a fast tele. It is stopped down to f/3.2, though. The toad, I just liked. My wife spotted it, told me to go look, and I complied. Usually she has little concept of what might make a decent shot, so I don't always go look at whatever it is she's spotted; today, I'm glad I did. Kinda wish I woulda had the 100 Makro-Planar for this one, but it's a decent shot, nonetheless.

Well, I dunno about PD, but I like #3 and #5 quite a bit.
05-28-2011, 03:13 PM   #203
Veteran Member
TOUGEFC's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Brisbane
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,561
Todd your cat looks alot like my wife's cat-

Wide open with the 43-


100%-



Last edited by TOUGEFC; 05-28-2011 at 05:20 PM.
05-28-2011, 03:54 PM   #204
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
What I'm seeing from the posted shots is that a large extent, what people perceive as "pixie dust" is often a combination of sharp subject, soft background, with pleasingly complex bokeh (eg, not "nervous", but not just blurred beyond recognition, either). With that theory in mind, here are some shots from some lenses not generally considered to have "it". Curious how people will stack them up against those posted here. These are mostly images I've posted elsewhere in the recent past (because it's what I had up on Flickr), and many of you know what lenses I typically shoot with, but try look at these on their own merits. Mind you, I'm not saying they *do* have "it"; I'm just trying to understand what others are seeing. As it happens, 2 lenses account for a disproportionate number of these images, so maybe they are my most dusted lenses.

#1:


#2:


#3:


#4


#5


#6


#7


#8


On second thought, several of these images are all pretty light on the transition areas; they probably show *too* much isolation.
05-28-2011, 05:02 PM   #205
Senior Member
1r0nh31d3's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 136
Some nice pics Marc. I am not qualified to talk about pixie dust. To be honest my first month on the forum I thought people were being sarcastic when they talked about "pixie dust".

I will say this pic number seven is so F***ing majestic it hurts.
05-28-2011, 09:09 PM   #206
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
What I'm seeing from the posted shots is that a large extent, what people perceive as "pixie dust" is often a combination of sharp subject, soft background, with pleasingly complex bokeh
Interesting observation. I think I would agree with this. It seems to me that pixie dust has a lot to do with subject isolation against an "impressionistic" backgound.

Great photos too... proof in my eyes that pixie dust is really pixie fingers... some of them (esp #6) look every bit as pixie dusty as other images I've seen from ltds (the differences between them are largely due to personal taste - i.e., colour correction).

My first sample was the 50 1.4 wide open, the second was the FA 77 stopped down a tad. The second picture shows more of that "pleasingly complex" background, while my first photo is a better example of "bokeh annihilation". I would select between the two lenses for focal length alone, however, as I generally think they both do subject isolation perfectly well if I bother to set the aperture correctly.
05-29-2011, 12:47 AM   #207
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Bangalore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,435
Original Poster
Decided to give it a shot - from two different lenses, one picture was shot with a 'pixie dust' lens and another with a slightly underrated lens. Both pics are unmodified, not even sharpen or adjusted for anything. Just shot raw, resized and saved as jpeg:

Any guesses? (don't look at my signature pls)





.


.


.



.

.

Last edited by yusuf; 05-29-2011 at 01:00 AM.
05-29-2011, 01:00 AM   #208
Senior Member
opfor's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Oxford, UK
Photos: Albums
Posts: 274
QuoteOriginally posted by 1r0nh31d3 Quote
Some nice pics Marc. I am not qualified to talk about pixie dust. To be honest my first month on the forum I thought people were being sarcastic when they talked about "pixie dust".

I will say this pic number seven is so F***ing majestic it hurts.
My input would be 6, 7, & 8. Nice pics...
05-29-2011, 01:03 AM   #209
Veteran Member
Todd Adamson's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Iowa
Posts: 722
QuoteOriginally posted by yusuf Quote
Decided to give it a shot - from two different lenses, one picture was show with a 'pixie dust' lens and another with a slightly underrated lens. Both pics are unmodified, not even sharpen or adjusted for anything, shot raw, resized and saved as jpeg:

Any guesses? (don't look at my signature pls)
.
Well I'm only looking on my iPod, since I'm in bed. These don't look critically focused to me, but possibly that's just b/c they are unprocessed raw files? At any rate, #2 looks more "lively" to me.
05-29-2011, 09:43 AM   #210
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,679
Indeed yusuf. Neither of these portraits are sharp where it needs to be, and the lighting is flat. As such the rendition does not pop out to me as with a portrait with a 'dusted' look.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
dust, k-mount, pentax lens, picture, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Official Pentax Forums "Pixie Dust" Lens List Winnie Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 40 10-24-2016 03:52 AM
Pentax K-7 Dust Alert and Dust Removal Functions brosen Pentax DSLR Discussion 9 02-09-2016 04:43 AM
HowTo: Replace the first lens group in the 31 with that of the 77! Double pixie dust! feilb Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 1 04-01-2011 10:31 AM
Rendering and Pixie Dust GlennG Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 65 02-06-2011 02:21 PM
dust on sensor or dust on lens 41ants Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 10 10-08-2009 10:28 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:24 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top