[pschlute]

If I can be blunt. I find the image a bit busy. too many details. too sharp. Too many sharp pixels. I would probably prefer it if only some details had that leading sharpness/depth and the other perhaps bit more blurry, if it makes sense.

I'm not sure where to look in the image.

I really appreciate your honesty and you may well be right.

it is one of those images that I keep going back to in the belief it has something that just needs to be brought out. It may well be that I just need to let it go.

[BruceBanner]

Thanks Bruce! Man, I dunno but that Lensbaby is growing on me... that is a really great pic of your kid, I like the effect as used here.

I keep seeing those old SoftFocus Pentax FA85mm going for pretty reasonable bucks and I have heard they do a very similar effect as your baby... one day I'm just going to have to grab one for myself and see. I know the cliche' 1980's glam shots with all the overly soft focus borders don't do anything for me, but if the effect can be mild, and used with a little more class like you've shown is possible with nice bokeh, it might be fun, even for stills and macro work with an extension tube, etc. Lots of possibilities. I just keep wondering why I don't see more in use here on the forum, which makes me a little apprehensive about buying one. LOL!
Eric

I don't really know about those soft focus Pentax lenses, I've seen some shots but for me they miss a lot of the magic that the Lensbaby range seems to have. It's like they have softness but lack the bokeh twirl (that the Velvet range have) and are significantly less sharp (the Velvet 56 is one of my sharpest lenses I have ever used). The entire range of lensbaby is interesting, some like the Burnside push that petzval effect really well without the softness, some like the Sol45 have a tiltshift feature. There's lots of range to choose from in terms of nontypical lenses. I think if I were to start again I might go for the Velvet 85 and Burnside 35 as a nice coupling for differing focal lengths. The macro feature of the Velvet 56 is excellent and one of the reasons I have held onto it, and in fact the reason I let the also very excellent HD DA 35/2.8 Macro lens go.

My studio shot of my son was more of an experiment, I don't feel it went quite that well as I had hoped. Whilst I have captured some nice softness, the lack of interesting textured background has removed a lot of the magic. I think lensbaby lenses always benefit from having background context, I find them a little like the FA Ltds in that what's happening out of focus is as interesting and captivating to view as what's happening in focus. The studio shot I took offers too little and we don't get to appreciate the swirl effect as much as we could.

Feel free to have a look at this album with the Velvet 56; Lensbaby Velvet 56/1.6 | Flickr for sure I think some of my best work has been done with this lens attached to my K-1. I really feel that the lensbaby is made for aperture stacking, these two shots probably showing that effect to it's fullest;



I have this one printed out and it looks simply marvellous (I show it to clients to see if they like that effect, it helps me understand if they like more traditional shots or are up for the crazy haha);

I got a lacklustre response to this image the first time round. Not sure if I am misguided or there is more to to this image. So trying again with a b+w version. please be honest.

K1 + FA 31mm 1.8 Ltd

I'd be interested to see the colour version.

My 2 cents is that with monochroming it's typically done for a reason. I tend to monochrome from the start, my camera settings can be quite different to how I might shoot the coloured version, I might push the EV compensation harder for example. I have my own rules for black & white but apparently my thinking is similar to already established rules for monochroming something;

1) By taking away colour you help the subject focus their attention on the images 'left over' qualities. These would be composition, lines, focus and out of focus areas, contrast between light and dark areas, transitions of darkness to light. By removing the colour you 'dazzle' the viewer less and assist with taking their mind to the other strengths of the shot you might want to highlight, in a way the removal of colour amplifies the other aspects, with colour it can balance it more.

2) Perhaps some colours in the shot really clash and are not pleasing, monochroming can solve that to some degree (especially if you don't want to try Photoshopping a fluro pink vest in a green forest and change that pink colour to something more gentle, so just mono the shot.

Always typically tho, when you have a colour shot and simply toggle it to monochrome it loses that battle if the monochrome version has not seen the same amount of editing time and attention that you gave the colour version. Too many people edit for 5-10mins on the colour, then hit a black and white button to compare, that is not a fair 'battle' at all. The same time needs spend on the mono version, preferably from start, so it's not a bad idea to 'Create a virtual copy' (if using LR) and start from scratch with the mono version. Typically you will adjust the sliders quite differently, in fact if you have ever done a nice monochrome edit and done the reverse and hit the colour button they can look really off! So the two are quite separate editing styles.

I have found RNI to being really useful for monochroming, there's as much to choose from in terms of style, fade, contrast, grain and all sorts of other variables that can make monochroming as diverse in styles as the colour offerings can.

My feeling in your shot is that it is busy, but that is the scene itself, not your doing (ie you made no mistake here, you captured it excellently), I think the edge lillypad like plants are the focus for me, and I feel they would stand out really well in a colour shot.
With colour editing we have a heap of variables open also. We can choose to render those edge pond plant colours different to the rest, we can change those green tones to being quite indifferent from the rest of the image, we can choose to have a softer colour approach, a desaturated look as well. It looks like a good image to play with, I look forward to seeing the older colour version and any more you might have a bash at rendering.

[photoptimist]

If I can be blunt. I find the image a bit busy. too many details. too sharp. Too many sharp pixels. I would probably prefer it if only some details had that leading sharpness/depth and the other perhaps bit more blurry, if it makes sense.

I'm not sure where to look in the image.

What you say is true about not being sure where to look in the image. And it is true for exactly the reasons you state.

And yet the picture is a delightful example of a certain style of landscape photograph that strives for this very property of edge to edge detail. No matter where you look in the scene, there is more scenery. In that regard, this photograph more faithfully replicates the real world and the infinite detail it presents to the explorer's eye.

Not all photographs need a focal point. Rather than lead the eye in one direction to one thing, some photographs invite -- even force -- wide-ranging exploration. Like a "Where's Waldo" image, the point is not the Waldo but all the myriad other interesting details of the scene.

Like so many things in photography (and life), the reason one person does not like a certain photograph or camera is the same reason someone else likes it.

[barondla]

I got a lacklustre response to this image the first time round. Not sure if I am misguided or there is more to to this image. So trying again with a b+w version. please be honest.

K1 + FA 31mm 1.8 Ltd

Like the image. Similar to those pen & ink photo accurate drawings. Hyper realistic. Wouldn't want every image like this.
Thanks for sharing,
barondla

[WPRESTO]

I got a lacklustre response to this image the first time round. Not sure if I am misguided or there is more to to this image. So trying again with a b+w version. please be honest. K1 + FA 31mm 1.8 Ltd

For me the image has an antique quality. I could be convinced it was taken in the late 19th century as the subject, framing, and especially tonal qualities remind me of early scenic story-telling photography (= it's more than a place, the image is trying to convey some nostalgia or feeling about what might happen or did happen at this place). It is moody, both in subject and treatment, but it doesn't "grab" my attention. An interesting image, but not a "wow."

[Hattifnatt]

Back to sunsets. Guess I posted a lot of pictures from this place, sorry for being repetitive but it's the close to my office so after work it's the only place I can be just in time to catch the sunset.

[Erictator]

I got a lacklustre response to this image the first time round. Not sure if I am misguided or there is more to to this image. So trying again with a b+w version. please be honest.
K1 + FA 31mm 1.8 Ltd

I'm going to buck the trend and say I like it as is... and give an explanation. Every photo we take tends to serve a purpose. If the viewer doesn't "get" that purpose, then it is lost on them and they won't like it.

Add to that, this particular viewing audience is made up of fellow photographers, so we all have our own bailiwicks and viewpoints of how the world should work and what we like in a photo, because we are all trying to express different things with our images. (and tend to have strong opinions as a result)

For me, your photo hearkens back to when I used medium and large format folding camera's (no, I'm not THAT old, I just went through a period where I liked to play with old film camera's for a while) where they didn't have a TTL viewfinder, so I did a lot of hyper-focal focusing, like the old days where some even belonged to the F64 Group, where everything was attempted to be in focus. I found this great for large framed wall prints, where your intended viewer was in a waiting room or lobby, and would kill time scanning the picture for details, bits and bobs of interest, and get lost in the depth of it. Like I said, every picture tends to serve a purpose, even if not the one we intended.

The use of B&W is a great option for reducing unwanted distractions from the primary photo intent. Like a dead branch in an otherwise healthy tree, or a red Coke can floating near the shore line (I just made that up, I didn't see or look for these in this photo, but you get the idea. Nowadays, we'd just clone that out, heh )

So, if you like it pschlute, have fun with it. It's your image, and if it works for you, that's a very good thing! If you try to broaden the appeal, I'm afraid we lose a little bit of what makes you, well... you!
Eric

[normhead]

From a few days ago, I forgot to post.
K-1 and DFA 100 2.8 macro WR

[mattb123]

Nice dramatic sunset last night. Also, the yucca are blooming like we haven't seen in a few years and those are always pretty cool too.
K-1ii & 15-30




24-70 (and Pluto Trigger)

[fs999]

Crop Mode • 100 ISO • Pentax DA* 200mm F2.8 ED SDM


FF Mode • 400 ISO • Sigma Art 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM
Rabbit with Old Style Mustard

[teiki arii]

Barque catalane in the evening for St Jean celebration, Pentax K-1 (II) Sigma Art 35/1.4 W.O. 1600Iso, 1/200s, MF...

[eaglem]

Pink tipped with starburst

[Racer X 69]

I got a lacklustre response to this image the first time round. Not sure if I am misguided or there is more to to this image. So trying again with a b+w version. please be honest.

K1 + FA 31mm 1.8 Ltd

I would try a bit different composition, with the building as the subject. Also, try a color version, it looks like there is plenty of vegetation to add interest to the shot.

[normhead]

K-1 and DFA 100 macro, or DA*55 1.4
A few samples from a day in town.

The farmer's market








The steam engine


A may fly




A piper


A drummer


Produce


A butterfly


A damselfly


Altogether a pretty good day.

[Racer X 69]

Well, I haven't been by here in a while. Some awesome work from everyone, as usual.

I picked up a Pentax-A* 600 f5.6 quite a while back, but only just today mounted it up and gave it a spin.

My rock crusher cone fire pit, from the upstairs porch. A 15 image panorama, shot with the K-1, and Pentax-A* 600mm f5.6. Stitched and processed with Adobe Photoshop.

This lens is awesome. Coupled with the K-1 it really works well. Pixel peepers click through to my Flickr and view the full size image. Be forewarned, the final image was so large I had to save a smaller, "for the web" version, but even that is huge.





Cross posted everywhere.