On 11-04-05 5:14 AM, Larry Colen wrote:
On Apr 5, 2011, at 2:05 AM, Joseph McAllister wrote:
On Apr 5, 2011, at 01:38 , Larry Colen wrote:
On Apr 5, 2011, at 1:24 AM, Boris Liberman wrote:
On 4/5/2011 11:01, Krisjanis Linkevics wrote:
Beautiful. A welcome distraction from this "sharpness trumps everything" world.
kris
Thanks. I still regret (now a bit more) parting with this lens...
By the way, my hunt for soft filter produced no results that I could have
stayed with.
By filters do you mean physical filters?
Because I think that taking sharpness out of a photo is something that could be
done trivially easily in digital post processing.
But, the 85 Soft does not diminish the sharpness of the photo. It merely
provides varying degrees of 'fog' around the sharp image.
All of my digital signal processing classes were nearly 30 years ago, so I
don't have the mathematical chops to do it today, but that's still just a
simple 2-d transform, possibly using a high pass filter for edge detection.
Two points about that.
The lens does a 3D transform. By the time you get the image, the sensor
has removed the directional information and all you get to work with is
a 2D plane with colour and luminance information. All spatial info is lost.
If *all* the information available from the light was recorded by the
sensor, you could do away with the lens entirely. You could simply
expose the sensor through the empty lens mount and recreate the scene
later with digital signal processing. (I read of some recent research
work to do just that.)
So there's stuff going on in glass-space that you simply cannot
replicate in post-processing.
But the second point is that you can do a pretty good PP fake of this
soft lens effect. The Orton effect isn't identical, but looks quite similar.
-bmw
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
