Alas, poor Mamiya. I knew it well, Horatio.

[mrca]

I thought would post an example of the sharpness and micro contrast you get when you couple a nikon d850 with a zeiss lens, here a 100 mm makro planar. I was getting ready to update a profile shot because I lost 51 lbs for a bodybuilding show 2 weeks ago and I don't look like what I did at 203 lbs now at 152. I realized my 25 yr old MF film Mamiya which has exceeded my d 700 in tonal transitions and resolution til I started shooting the d850 with Zeiss glass. It reminded me of the graveyard scene in Hamlet where he looks into the empty eye sockets of the skull of dead Yorick, a jester who gave him much enjoyment in his youth. It is Shakespeare's commentary on our morality and this shot is the same but refers also to the obsolescence of our cameras. Often in 3-5 years, digital camera's are obsolete. Here, I am looking into the one eye of the camera, remembering the joy it brought me but now, it has less usage than before, having been moved to obsolete. This is a 7 light source shot, 5 lights and 2 reflectors. The last was a bear lining up because I shot this alone and getting the rim light on the already lit profile and the top of the lens barrel to convey what the surface feels like with the specular highlight edge transition and and still getting the bead of light on the profile was difficult with me not being able to see what I was adjusting. Note the incredible detail on the texture of the sides of the camera created by skimming the main light across it as rendered by the camera lens combo. But for those who know the wonderful finish on those older lenses, not the plastic crap we get from china now, oh, and the zeiss lenses are metal bodied and have that same tactile experience, specular edge transfer tells you what a surface feels like, what it's surface efficiency is. Look at the reflection of a flashlight on a shiny car with black paint, immediate, hard edge between highlight and black. Shine it on suede, a wider highlight edge transfer. Oh, the image just took best in show

in a local photo competition.

 

[zulu42]

Awesome. The lighting is exquisite. I would say that it is acceptably sharp
Nice work all around, including the weight loss.

 

[thebasedsloth]

Kind of a waste of 5 lights, what exactly were you trying to accomplish with them all?? this shot looks super flat and it may even be TOO sharp. The skin looks a little weird, plasticy even. The shadows seem overfilled, killing all dimension on you which isn't very flattering.

 

[Jeff15]

Nice image, great light.......

 

[Fujidave]

Great image and the PP works beautifully.

 

[mrca]

It's a matter of making the multiple lights not apparent. I wasn't "trying" to accomplish that , I accomplished it if you can't tell especially if you fancy yourself as a photographer. I don't follow "rules" I make art. And I don't mean tilting, blurring and saturating being "art." What percentage of portraits are profiles? How often do you see a kicker on the lit profile? You probably didn' t get the reference that preceding photography "portraits" cameos were flat profiles cut on stone with different layers of color, usually white subject, darker background. It's an homage to early portraiture on another level . Over filled shadows? Can you see the micro contrast from forehead, cheeks, neck that would be missing with nikon or sigma lenses with 18 to 24 pieces of glass? I see cheekbones, jaw line, each individual hair. Hardly flat. There is a full tonal range from detail in black to detail in the edge lights. That is not an accident. It's called precise metering. The skin is 71 yrs old and the scars and broken nose, (compliments of a welter weight champ of the world), were all earned. This is a fine art shot, not some snap shot, so the face being the main subject of the photo, was intended to be the brightest area and kicked up accordingly. Squint and look at the shot and note the brightest/area of highest contrast is the subject. That directs the viewers eye there. The implied line of my looking at the lens leads the viewer to the camera. There is another light controlling the tone of the entire background to taste and a second creating chiaroscuro (light against dark) and dimensionality to what would be a flat, boring background without it like say a boring all white or black bg. I do not use the cliched bg halo, so 1990's. It also adds separation from the bg beyond the 4 sources that are precisely matched to produce a continuous even rim light around the subject. Makes the difficult look easy and not detectable. This is a finely crafted image every light there for a reason. Most photographers won't realize this is a combination product and portrait shot. The skimming main light from L reveals the texture of the back and side of the camera. The R fill and L kicker reveal the surface efficiency and feel of the lens surface with their specular highlights. I don't expect most photographers to have a clue about how the specular edge transition tells the brain what a surface feels like much less even know what a specular edge transition is. Too sharp? Usually people on these sites only care about sharpness. It's all they know. That and the saturation slider. It's how many buy lenses like buying wine for alcohol content. With this resolution it will easily make a 16x20 or 20x24 print. I just set up a 24 inch printer for such prints. I will use Epson Legacy Platine paper that is able to hold the shadow detail because it uses photo black ink even though it is a cotton base, but the highlights aren't to hot with it's 85% brightness. It is what I like to use for my fine art portraits and has a 200 life for color and 400 for black and white. Oh I would add, Professional Photographers of America apparently thought I know what I am doing, I have both won and judged their professional competitions and they placed me in charge of their mentor program where I lived in northern Ca. Now I hope you can see how this is a crafted image, all of the elements there for a reason, all the lights. Not only did the 3 judges with more than 100 years experience between them make this best in class and best in show, I really liked it that a waitress also thought it was best in show with no clue what it was about or it's the technical aspects.

 

[Derrel]

Kind of a waste of 5 lights, what exactly were you trying to accomplish with them all?? this shot looks super flat and it may even be TOO sharp. The skin looks a little weird, plasticy even. The shadows seem overfilled, killing all dimension on you which isn't very flattering.

See response in Post #6...

 

[Dave442]

Nice, it looks like you put the dedication into the shot just like you did to lose those 51 pounds.

 

[thebasedsloth]

It's a matter of making the multiple lights not apparent. I wasn't "trying" to accomplish that , I accomplished it if you can't tell especially if you fancy yourself as a photographer. I don't follow "rules" I make art. And I don't mean tilting, blurring and saturating being "art." What percentage of portraits are profiles? How often do you see a kicker on the lit profile? You probably didn' t get the reference that preceding photography "portraits" cameos were flat profiles cut on stone with different layers of color, usually white subject, darker background. It's an homage to early portraiture on another level . Over filled shadows? Can you see the micro contrast from forehead, cheeks, neck that would be missing with nikon or sigma lenses with 18 to 24 pieces of glass?...

I'll start by saying my initial critique may have be unwanted and bit harsh, but this was an incredibly arrogant and defensive response. Your high opinion of yourself didn't convince me that this image was any more technically correct or aesthetically pleasing. I never accused you of breaking any "rules" either but clearly they're something you care a lot about so maybe you should relearn them before you try to break 'em and randomly recite them to milkmen on the internet. You did all that work to draw attention to your face but none to draw attention away from your neck, which is where my eye goes way before it ever sees there's a camera there. Also you should learn the difference between sharpening for a computer screen and a print, since it sounds like you went all out to make this tangible on paper then posted the same file on here.

It looks strange and unrealistic, and not in a painterly way, and that's what I was getting at. It lacks character. You can call it fine art if you want but that seems like a crutch.

Also good job on the award, it must look nice framed on your mantle next to all these sharp prints of yourself.

 

[otherprof]

I thought would post an example of the sharpness and micro contrast you get when you couple a nikon d850 with a zeiss lens, here a 100 mm makro planar. I was getting ready to update a profile shot because I lost 51 lbs for a bodybuilding show 2 weeks ago and I don't look like what I did at 203 lbs now at 152. I realized my 25 yr old MF film Mamiya which has exceeded my d 700 in tonal transitions and resolution til I started shooting the d850 with Zeiss glass. It reminded me of the graveyard scene in Hamlet where he looks into the empty eye sockets of the skull of dead Yorick, a jester who gave him much enjoyment in his youth. It is Shakespeare's commentary on our morality and this shot is the same but refers also to the obsolescence of our cameras. Often in 3-5 years, digital camera's are obsolete. Here, I am looking into the one eye of the camera, remembering the joy it brought me but now, it has less usage than before, having been moved to obsolete. This is a 7 light source shot, 5 lights and 2 reflectors. The last was a bear lining up because I shot this alone and getting the rim light on the already lit profile and the top of the lens barrel to convey what the surface feels like with the specular highlight edge transition and and still getting the bead of light on the profile was difficult with me not being able to see what I was adjusting. Note the incredible detail on the texture of the sides of the camera created by skimming the main light across it as rendered by the camera lens combo. But for those who know the wonderful finish on those older lenses, not the plastic crap we get from china now, oh, and the zeiss lenses are metal bodied and have that same tactile experience, specular edge transfer tells you what a surface feels like, what it's surface efficiency is. Look at the reflection of a flashlight on a shiny car with black paint, immediate, hard edge between highlight and black. Shine it on suede, a wider highlight edge transfer. Oh, the image just took best in show View attachment 166095 in a local photo competition.

I love it! It reminds me of the work of Yousuf Karsh.

 

[mrca]

A collection of Karsh's work is on my coffee table. His Churchill (without cigar because he grabbed it from him), Hemingway and Georgia O'Keefe photos are my favorites. As to sloth's response, it ain't braggin if you can do it as Dizzy Dean said. Unrealistic? Photography has to be realistic? For non artists it does. Sorry if I am too busy to mess around re sharpening for the web. It isn't high on my priority list. Are the milk men you are referring to photographers who think gross photos of people sitting on toilets with silly expressions is cool? Does your eye go to the toilets there? I'm sure your walls are lined with photos of people sitting on toilets and think it is cute or creative. Literal bathroom humor. Oh, and there isn't a single photo of me on my walls, just photos with ribbons or magazine covers beside them. What are YOUR credentials to give you standing to be so abusively critical? That's a sign of insecurity. When I judge or critique work, I always try to do it tactfully, not like a flaming ahole. Gotta never forget the web has it's share of jerks.

 

[Derrel]

This post was thoroughly eviscerated at an off site blog.

 

[bribrius]

The light placement on the left blew out the back of the camera by the looks of it. Just bright white. I like the softness of background. It is a well cliched pose (but what isn't?). It does look like a "true black" least i like the tone. The image , i dunno? Seems a little bland for me in a way. And a little corny. Though probably better than i could do. I guess i should think about it a bit more. Like, compared to some stuff out there, but just doesnt really dazzle. It is totally counting on camera quality, lens quality. Not that artistic. But i think that was the point he was driving home. What he was saying. His point.

The failure in it might be, without knowing ahead of time his point, or knowing the reason for what he is holding what he is, or the camera taking the photo in comparison. Without this information the photo lacks any story or merit. Explanation cards would be needed or they just see a guy staring at something.. It isn't sustaining itself independently, and actually kind of looks corny without the history and explanation.

 

[bribrius]

This post was thoroughly eviscerated at an off-site blog.

Well it ain't THAT bad geez, just has a point to it somewhat what obscure imo.

 

[bribrius]

I thought would post an example of the sharpness and micro contrast you get when you couple a nikon d850 with a zeiss lens, here a 100 mm makro planar. I was getting ready to update a profile shot because I lost 51 lbs for a bodybuilding show 2 weeks ago and I don't look like what I did at 203 lbs now at 152. I realized my 25 yr old MF film Mamiya which has exceeded my d 700 in tonal transitions and resolution til I started shooting the d850 with Zeiss glass. It reminded me of the graveyard scene in Hamlet where he looks into the empty eye sockets of the skull of dead Yorick, a jester who gave him much enjoyment in his youth. It is Shakespeare's commentary on our morality and this shot is the same but refers also to the obsolescence of our cameras. Often in 3-5 years, digital camera's are obsolete. Here, I am looking into the one eye of the camera, remembering the joy it brought me but now, it has less usage than before, having been moved to obsolete. This is a 7 light source shot, 5 lights and 2 reflectors. The last was a bear lining up because I shot this alone and getting the rim light on the already lit profile and the top of the lens barrel to convey what the surface feels like with the specular highlight edge transition and and still getting the bead of light on the profile was difficult with me not being able to see what I was adjusting. Note the incredible detail on the texture of the sides of the camera created by skimming the main light across it as rendered by the camera lens combo. But for those who know the wonderful finish on those older lenses, not the plastic crap we get from china now, oh, and the zeiss lenses are metal bodied and have that same tactile experience, specular edge transfer tells you what a surface feels like, what it's surface efficiency is. Look at the reflection of a flashlight on a shiny car with black paint, immediate, hard edge between highlight and black. Shine it on suede, a wider highlight edge transfer. Oh, the image just took best in show View attachment 166095 in a local photo competition.

Good photo. On the story line, you had to tell everyone what it was about and for. So you already know its shortcomings without anyone mentioning it. A further explanation is normal, but usually the viewer has some idea without the explanation. Maybe if you wrote down "this is what i want to say". Then brainstormed the best way to get what you wanted to say through to the viewer, camera angles, positioning, maybe not even shooting the shot with the 850 but having both those cameras and you positioned in the frame to help tell the story. A creative camera angle. Creative positioning. I dunno. Still a good shot, but you might have missed your mark on getting your story through. My credentials? None. I am in a little art association and thats about it,