The western ascent of Honister Pass

[Alan Clark]

It always amuses me to think that Joanna uses noise reduction on musicians. I remember she did it a while ago on a banjo player...

 

[Toby Webster]

Ha!

 

[Helen Summers]

Very drole guys.

I really feel I have to say something about the last couple or three posts here. Would you kindly get off Joanna's case because I find your smart remarks in this instance at best unkind and at worst mocking. As far as I can see Joanna was doing her best to be helpful. If you don't agree with her fine and say so, that's what this forum is all about. But please don't make smart comments at hers or anyones expense. I cannot recall a single instance where Joanna has been unkind to anyone in the forum no matter how much her opinion has differed.

I enjoy being part of this forum and the way we can agree to differ politely. Let's not start step away from that and continue to treat each other with the same degree of respect and kindness that we expect to receive ourselves.

 

[John King]

Agreed, it may be the combination of internal lighting, high ISO and the over zealous application of propriety noise reduction, followed by a boost to micro contrast. Sometimes a bit of a science experiment to prove a point loses some of the emotion the noise / grain provides an image. That guys fingers look very anaemic, perhaps a doctor is needed

In the 2nd picture it appears to me it has nothing to to do with melted plastic, boosting the contrast or anything else to do with with manipulation, but the law unto optics. If you look at the right hand of the musician that has a sharp outline while the other is blurred. is it not just simply out of focus? The 'mute' held against the instrument shows this even more clearly. The plane of sharp focus is evident with the keys, the right hand and the gentleman's beard. The left hand is plainly and simply out of sharp focus.

 

[Joanna Carter]

Joanna, but in your second photo the hands and the coat look unnaturally smooth - like melted plastic with no hint of texture. He is playing with a mute. Maybe he has muted the texture...
I am aware of the fact that we have discussed this before. And I know you have a preference for the smooth, grain -free look. I respect that, and like the fact that we can discuss these things and agree to differ.

Alan

You need to bear in mind that this was shot with a 135mm lens at f/5.6, so sharpness is going to be selective anyway

 

[Alan Clark]

Joanna, I'm not sure that sharpness has much relevance here. I was referring to the lack of texture in objects that should have texture. Texture is still evident, if it is there in a photograh, even if it is out of focus. And in any case the player's right hand is in sharp focus , but still lacks texture, and looks distinctly odd to my eyes.

 

[Chris J. Zähller]

In the 2nd picture it appears to me it has nothing to to do with melted plastic, boosting the contrast or anything else to do with with manipulation, but the law unto optics. If you look at the right hand of the musician that has a sharp outline while the other is blurred. is it not just simply out of focus? The 'mute' held against the instrument shows this even more clearly. The plane of sharp focus is evident with the keys, the right hand and the gentleman's beard. The left hand is plainly and simply out of sharp focus.

This is what I thought as well.

 

[John King]

Joanna, I'm not sure that sharpness has much relevance here. I was referring to the lack of texture in objects that should have texture. Texture is still evident, if it is there in a photograh, even if it is out of focus. And in any case the player's right hand is in sharp focus , but still lacks texture, and looks distinctly odd to my eyes.

It is a case of simply a section being out of focus. The fingers poised over the keys are in focus, but possible the contrast has unintentionally hidden that, but you can clearly see the edges of the musicians finger nails which are in focus. Whereas on the other, closer hand, the finger nails are way out of focus. With it being out of focus there is no hope of getting any texture. I think it is a case of some looking for a problem that does not exist.

The actual picture is of the musician's face, the texture of his beard, and the half closed eyes, say it all. The other parts are just there and make up the whole image, but the focus of observation should not be on the hands, they are not the picture. Cover over the out of focus high contrast hand and the image falls apart, it is an integral part of the picture to tell the story. And here it does.

Think of it another way, had the focus been on the hand holding the mute, the face would be a dark blur. In a picture of a person I always feel that a persons face is all important such as here. the hand and the lower part of the picture are secondary but are all essential components

It is a picture over which Joanna had little control, harsh lighting, a small zone, which is in focus, but the dark area of the face which is the most important would necessitate the apperture of the lens to be near wide open, and we ALL know what happens then a lens is used wide open with limited depth of field - don't we?

 

[Alan Clark]

John, you seem to be presenting opinions as facts. And you seem to be telling me what I can like and what I can't like. That's ridiculous. I don't like tinned salmon. You could tell me every day for a month that I should like it, but I still wouldn't...
You need to sort out the difference between facts, opinions and personal taste. And please - don't give me another sermon.

 

[John King]

The difference between out of focus and in focus is fact! What happens with depth of field when a lens is opened up, is Fact! If the focus had been on the lower hand and the exposure adjusted to give detail of the skin the mans face would have been under exposed, and very dark! Fact. Ask yourself was it a picture of a person holding a mute to a musical instrument or was it a portrait. My opinion it was a portrait, and if the face had been in shadow and virtually impossible to see that would have been pointless. Personal taste, it is not a subject I would have taken but we have to accept that Joanna did, and actually made quite a good job of it and does not deserve to have her work criticised so harshly. End of!

I think we will never agree and I cannot see this pointless argument being of benefit to forum users.

 

[Alan Clark]

John. I have not criticised Joanna harshly. You are making most of this up. All I have said is that I find the smoothness and lack of detail in the coat and hands rather odd, and unnatural.
I wouldn't even have made a comment about this but Joanna posted the picture to show how her working method produces natural textures. And, clearly, it didn't.