Sharp myths

willli · Dec 30, 2009

In my time as a photographer I always hear my photography professors or teachers said watch your focus. The first lesson that I learn in the live environment as a photographer was photography rules are there to be modify and even broke in certain situations because that is what is bring your own style on the set.

Now my question: Is a soft photo not acceptable? Why?

With my wedding customers it become that the photos that are soft are they favorites because ad this sense of romance and love in the picture.

We use out of focus to redirect the eye in to the subject of the photo and also I've been seen soft photos as an expression of a more creative style.

I would like hear different opinions about this subject.

Thanks

IgsEMT · Dec 30, 2009

I would like hear different opinions about this subject.

with lovely Bronica, one of the tools of the trade was len's wipes (not just clothes for dust) and tube of Vaseline to apply it around 150mm lens for softening.
I agree with you on soft images as they imply romance, and happy lovely time but few but there's a difference b/n soft and out of focus. This, you know but not many, especially newcomers understand. I'm pretty sure that in your soft formal portraits, eyes are fairly sharp and emphasized

Shockey · Dec 30, 2009

Typically if the eyes are in focus that is step one.
From there focus/depth of field can be used as a tool.
Yes a lot of people like the soft romantic effect of portraits and some wedding shots.
Soft photos can very acceptable in some circumstances.

willli · Dec 30, 2009

IgsEMT said:
I'm pretty sure that in your soft formal portraits, eyes are fairly sharp and emphasized

Click to expand...

Yes indeed they are. That is something that I will never leave out of focus.

Joves · Dec 30, 2009

It like any other aspect of art is in the eye of the beholder. It is much like the noise debate at high ISOs. I tend to find that most who complain about noise have never shot film or, shot with only lower ISO film, when they did. I take alot of complaints about softness like I do about noise pretty much the same, without much notice. Not everything in life is sharp and, with defined clarity and, so it is with photography.

Josh66 · Dec 30, 2009

willli said:
Now my question: Is a soft photo not acceptable? Why?

Depends...

I mean, it's pretty hard to say what would be too soft, or what wouldn't - but I think I would know the difference when I saw it.

Sometimes softness is good, other times it's not. I don't think anyone here will be able to tell you definitively where the line is.

patrickt · Dec 30, 2009

Softness is fine if you intend the photo should be soft for a particular effect. That's why they sell soft lenses. An out of focus picture because you didn't focus properly or one blurred by camera motion unintentionally is not fine.

Edward Weston's photo of Mexico's President Orozco was slightly blurry because it was late in the day and his lens would not go wide enough to permit a faster shutter speed. His comment on the picture was that it was "practically satisfactory". I agree. However, if it were enlarged to 11x14 or 16x20 I think people would find it unpleasantly and distractingly blurry.

Josh66 · Dec 30, 2009

I agree.

Softness and 'missed focus' are not the same, and should not be considered as such.

willli · Dec 30, 2009

Yes agree with you guys softness and out of focus are two different things. What I mean is something that has been done on purpose a reflect of movement or a defocusing technique in the DDR to obtain the desire effect

KmH · Dec 30, 2009

LOL. I just figured out he meant myths. Doh~!

willli · Dec 30, 2009

LOL my BAD english is not my first language LOL could a Mod can fix my mistake LOL please

KmH · Dec 30, 2009

willli said:
LOL my BAD english is not my first language LOL could a Mod can fix my mistake LOL please

willi, there's lots of people who's first language IS English that would have spelled it the same way. I looked at it 10 times before it dawned on me.

I don't get why they have it set up so you can't go back and fix thread titles, but I'm sure there's a good reason.

Josh66 · Dec 30, 2009

KmH said:
I don't get why they have it set up so you can't go back and fix thread titles, but I'm sure there's a good reason.

If you're fast enough, you can edit it. You only have a minute or two though.

djacobox372 · Dec 31, 2009

It's easy to add softness in photoshop or with traditional darkroom printing, but you can't add sharpness.

But, admittedly, there is something about a old/soft lens that creates a dreamy look that is a bit hard to recreate in photoshop due to the low dynamic range stored in photos.