Soft and Sharp, Balancing?


Status
Not open for further replies.

togu

Senior Member
Jul 11, 2002
5,290
0
0
44
@ D08
www.tommygui.com
#1
After seeing some weird shots, suddenly thought of this topic to chat about. :)

Do you think a soft picture should have something sharp to bring out the feel? Such as your subject, or something captive? Was thinking if the whole picture is soft, it looks more like an OOF shot.


Any suggestions?

:think:
 

Zerstorer

Senior Member
Jul 8, 2002
3,437
0
0
#2
Notti notti...;)

Seriously, yes.

Otherwise there wouldn't be a "focus" in the image.

You can't have an image all sharp or all soft as there wouldn't be anything to anchor your attention.
 

YSLee

Senior Member
Jan 17, 2002
2,326
1
38
Visit site
#3
So togu, are you saying that:

Soft shots should have sharp parts so sharp parts bring out soft shots and soft shots should not have soft parts otherwise no sharp parts makes soft shots unsharp?
 

togu

Senior Member
Jul 11, 2002
5,290
0
0
44
@ D08
www.tommygui.com
#4
Originally posted by Zerstorer
Notti notti...;)

Seriously, yes.

Otherwise there wouldn't be a "focus" in the image.

You can't have an image all sharp or all soft as there wouldn't be anything to anchor your attention.

That's what I think too, not sure if there are any shooting styles which require the whole pic to be soft tho.

Soft shots should have sharp parts so sharp parts bring out soft shots...
Er... that's what I'm thinking

...and soft shots should not have soft parts otherwise no sharp parts makes soft shots unsharp?
Er....

:confused:

Isn't it the same as the first part?

:kok:
 

Zerstorer

Senior Member
Jul 8, 2002
3,437
0
0
#5
Originally posted by togu
That's what I think too, not sure if there are any shooting styles which require the whole pic to be soft tho.
Think some portrait shots are like that.
But there must still be a difference/contrast. Something like soft and extra soft.
 

togu

Senior Member
Jul 11, 2002
5,290
0
0
44
@ D08
www.tommygui.com
#6
Originally posted by Zerstorer
Think some portrait shots are like that.
But there must still be a difference/contrast. Something like soft and extra soft.

Wow, sounds pretty cool. But for portrait shots, seems like the more prefered style will be picture soft, but the face, espcially the eyes extremely sharp.

Any suggestions what kind of scenario can we use the soft/extra soft style? Was thinking of something retro, or floral. :confused:
 

BraveHart

New Member
Jan 17, 2002
864
0
0
40
Singapore
www.ef2pt8.com
#7
It can be sad...but sometimes we are just UNABLE to get a sharp shot...yet we have to show something from the shoot....so we just DIE DIE have to post something....and relatively unsharp shots get displayed lor :)
 

jeffgoh

New Member
Jul 22, 2002
461
0
0
jeffgoh.clubsnap.org
#8
Originally posted by BraveHart
It can be sad...but sometimes we are just UNABLE to get a sharp shot...yet we have to show something from the shoot....so we just DIE DIE have to post something....and relatively unsharp shots get displayed lor :)
:faint:
 

Larry

Senior Member
Apr 25, 2002
5,499
0
0
45
singapore
www.larryloh.com
#9
Originally posted by YSLee
Soft shots should have sharp parts so sharp parts bring out soft shots and soft shots should not have soft parts otherwise no sharp parts makes soft shots unsharp?
gimme headache.... :complain:
 

jeffgoh

New Member
Jul 22, 2002
461
0
0
jeffgoh.clubsnap.org
#10
anyway back to the topic.

a soft shot is a soft shot there is no such a thing call a balance.

the onli balance is in order to achieve a sharp and soft shot combination either use of aperatuure to control, filters or post processing to achieve. ( i guess this is wat u talking abt if i not wrong)

as long as it is a soft overall even thou composition wise is okie it is still technically wrong let alone try to cover up by composition or brushing it off as a arty farty shot.

just my 2 cents worth!!

PS: take it with a pinch of salt since i m a still a newbie in this hobby tat onli has like less than a year experience.. :)
 

Larry

Senior Member
Apr 25, 2002
5,499
0
0
45
singapore
www.larryloh.com
#12
Originally posted by sehsuan
then canon must have made a mistaken in designing a "soft focus" lens...
erm, there's a fine difference between a "soft image" and "soft focus"....

besides, to quote the EF Lens Works III book, the EF135mm f/2.8 with Softfocus (one of my dream lenses btw) is designed to "veil the subject in a soft fuzzy flare, while nevertheless maintaining the subject is sharp focus", using a specific type of spherical abberation. not the same as using a soft filter.
 

jeffgoh

New Member
Jul 22, 2002
461
0
0
jeffgoh.clubsnap.org
#13
Originally posted by sehsuan
then canon must have made a mistaken in designing a "soft focus" lens...
I think u r either mistaken abt the uses of it or u r not aware of the uses of this lens.

According to the literature that shipped with the lens:

"Thank you for purchasing the Canon Softfocus EF 135mm f/2.8.

It is an ideal lens for portraiture, because in addition to a regular, sharp-focus image, you can select continuously variable degrees of softness. The optical construction incorporating a glass-molded aspherical element produces a softening effect without aberration."

A soft lens doesnt mean it produce soft images. A soft lens give u control on whether u wan a how soft a result u wan and. it still gives sharp image or rather to which particular area u wan your subject to still command sharpness.

Nikon DC lens are the same... I suggest u go read up and understand the purpose and usage of it.
 

BraveHart

New Member
Jan 17, 2002
864
0
0
40
Singapore
www.ef2pt8.com
#14
Yes..there is a difference between soft focus, soft shots and out of focus shots.

Soft focus allows the highlights to bleed into the shadows, and the result is a diffused lighting that introduces a romantic, dreamy feel to the scene. Please note that despite this effect, the picture is still pretty much in focus and is sharp, just that the edges are not as hard.

As for soft shots and out of focus shots...nuff said.
 

sehsuan

Deregistered
Dec 12, 2002
6,598
0
0
38
Singapore
www.sportsshooter.com
#15
interesting terms, thanks for explaining, jeff + larry + bravehart. :)

but curiously, how do you tell a focus has been locked, if the image is soft-focussed?
 

togu

Senior Member
Jul 11, 2002
5,290
0
0
44
@ D08
www.tommygui.com
#16
Woot! Just learned how to use yahoo, some findings...


http://www.nickgallery.com/web_pages/technical 8.htm

http://www.lightingmagic.com/sfocusqa.htm#Advice on soft focus.

http://www.deneba.com/community/howto/soft_focus/default.html

http://goinside.com/03/4/10dt.html

http://www.pixilver.com/tutor_softfocus.html

http://www.digital-creativity.org.uk/tutorials/tutorial_12.html

http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/soft.html

and many more... :p

Er.. so beside BraveHart's romantic fantas :devil:y, any suggestions what other kind of scenario is ideal for the soft/extra soft or soft/sharp style? I'm still thinking of retro, floral etc.

Keep the ball rolling... :think:
 

Larry

Senior Member
Apr 25, 2002
5,499
0
0
45
singapore
www.larryloh.com
#17
Originally posted by togu
Er.. so beside BraveHart's romantic fantas :devil:y, any suggestions what other kind of scenario is ideal for the soft/extra soft or soft/sharp style? I'm still thinking of retro, floral etc.

Keep the ball rolling... :think:
still life... :thumbsup:
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom