Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-22-2011, 06:38 AM   #31
Veteran Member
TOUGEFC's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Brisbane
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,561
Yep, thats the entire setup.

04-22-2011, 01:27 PM   #32
Veteran Member
DaveHolmes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 1,501
QuoteOriginally posted by TOUGEFC Quote
Can clearly see the lighting setup, my postion and the glass panels on my front door.
That is cool! :-)
04-24-2011, 06:37 PM   #33
Site Supporter
slip's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 2 hours north of toronto ontario canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,515
QuoteOriginally posted by TOUGEFC Quote
TACK SHARP?
RAZOR SHARP?
or BRUTALLY SHARP?




Can clearly see the lighting setup, my postion and the glass panels on my front door.
I am very jealous of your equipment and that shot

great shot and beautiful portrait

cheers
04-26-2011, 06:25 PM   #34
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 251
QuoteOriginally posted by TOUGEFC Quote
TACK SHARP? RAZOR SHARP? or BRUTALLY SHARP?
I like that.... brutally sharp. Sometimes sharpness isn't what you want. For example, portraits with too much detail. Brings out too many flaws in my opinion.

04-26-2011, 11:20 PM   #35
Veteran Member
TOUGEFC's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Brisbane
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,561
Thanks for the comments guys
Yeah you dont want portraits to be sharp to see the flaws, but you want the eyes very sharp so thats what you focus on, if anything else is too sharp for your liking it is easy to soften it up with a touch of pp
04-27-2011, 10:51 AM   #36
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
QuoteOriginally posted by secateurs Quote
I like that.... brutally sharp. Sometimes sharpness isn't what you want. For example, portraits with too much detail. Brings out too many flaws in my opinion.
Brutally Sharp is my phrase -- scan back a few posts. My most Brutally Sharp lens is a Schneider Betavaron 50-125/4-5.6 enlarger zoom. Big, heavy, weird to use (I can't get the right focusing helicoid); and I do not DARE to shoot portraits with it! Not of women and children, anyway. Some guys are (or like to think of themselves as) 'warriors' and want to reveal every scar, line, pore, hair, pimple, mole, bead of sweat, fleck of dirt, smear of grease, body mod, etc. The kind of guys I shoot in B&W with tiny apertures, a Red filter, strong low-side light, etc. Yeah, Brutally Sharp is just right for them! The rest of us usually want ourselves airbrushed a little. No, you don't need to see my chicken-pox scars!
05-13-2011, 10:16 PM   #37
Senior Member
alwaysmichellerene's Avatar

Join Date: May 2011
Location: Western Washington
Photos: Albums
Posts: 135
QuoteOriginally posted by MPrince Quote
If it looks sharp at 100% then it's sharp. There is no point looking at an image greater than 100% except for doing extremely fine editing work.

(imho, of course)
Agreed.
05-20-2011, 02:11 PM   #38
Veteran Member
joe.penn's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Maryland (Right Outside Washington DC)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,902
QuoteOriginally posted by jjhenders Quote
Ricoh 1.7 50mm. Now I know I don't have any great lenses here
If that is the "P" Rikenon, then you do have a really good lens. That lens is contrasty, produces nice colors, really sharp (sharper than the 1.7 "M"'s) and produces great bokeh - do not under estimate this lens, it is a great lens to have in your bag... (and it is a lens that is capable of getting your "Tack Sharp" results with minimal effort)



---

05-20-2011, 03:53 PM   #39
Veteran Member
yeatzee's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Temecula
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,675
We need a macro that falls under that category



05-20-2011, 06:44 PM   #40
Inactive Account




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Ames, Iowa, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,965
Each image pixel from the camera is a uniform smudge of color. When displayed at 100%, each image pixel occupies one display pixel (which is also just a smudge of color.)

If you are looking at a normal computer display with pixels just discernible, then anything above 100% cannot be sharp by definition. For example, 200% means that one image pixel's uniform smudge is now smeared over two display pixels.... kind of like looking at the display with a 2x magnifying glass - all you see are bigger uniform colored pixels.

Actually, you can fake sharpness a bit by mathematically making pixels smaller and assuming that color and brightness changes are smooth in real life. Here's an example a clown's nose):


The image on the left is displayed at 400% & you can clearly see the individual pixels from the camera. The image on the right is a smoothed version which looks a little better from a distance - move your head back from the display & the image on the right will get to look pretty good. Pull your head a long way back and they both look good.

Last edited by newarts; 05-20-2011 at 07:20 PM.
05-20-2011, 06:54 PM   #41
Pentaxian
JohnBee's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: front of computer
Posts: 4,496
QuoteOriginally posted by newarts Quote
The image on the left is displayed at 400% & you can clearly see the individual pixels from the camera. The image on the right is a smoothed version which looks a little better from a distance (move your head back from the display & the image on the right will get to look pretty good. Pull your head a long way back and they both look good.
Wow those are very useful images - thanks for posting them.
05-20-2011, 07:18 PM   #42
Pentaxian
Ratmagiclady's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,464
'Tack sharp' is when editors stop complaining before reducing a photo to newsprint...
05-22-2011, 05:55 PM   #43
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Parallax's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Dakota
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,103
QuoteOriginally posted by Ratmagiclady Quote
'Tack sharp' is when editors stop complaining before reducing a photo to newsprint...
As someone who used to make a living making halftones for newsprint, first in the darkroom and later on a computer, "tack sharp" is anything recognizable. Obviously that's an exaggeration, but not as much as you might think.
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!
camera, pentax help, photography, tack
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Is this as sharp as it should be? Todd Adamson Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 29 11-03-2010 01:34 AM
People Sharp photo @ f/8 Larsenio Post Your Photos! 22 10-24-2010 06:46 PM
Nature Sharp enough? christophleipzig Photo Critique 5 10-16-2010 01:40 AM
For Sale - Sold: Tamron SP 90mm f/2.8 Di Macro AF - excellent condition/tack sharp (US) imadethis Sold Items 4 04-04-2010 04:38 PM
Is my A*300mm F2.8 Sharp Enough? cps_goodbuy Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 33 02-27-2010 06:29 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:24 AM. | 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