Hi William,
Truthfully, I wasn't thinking of your post when I wrote my response to Fred
and Shel. If you look at the part of my post you didn't quote (was I too
windy?) you'll see that I basically agree with you. What stays with me will
be as sharp as I can shoot, and what goes out will be my best attempt to
make a flattering portrait of my subject (flattering in their eyes, not
necessarily mine).
However, if you would like to trade your 77mm ltd. for a coke bottle, <g>
I've got one in 'super +++minty' condition.
Dan Scott ("show me the pores, baby...")
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Dan said:
>> Well guys, personally, I want portraits to be as sharp and as
>accurate as
>> possible, too. I think my photos of my friends and family
>should look like
>> the people I see and know.
>> Dan Scott
>
<snip>
> Lets not get carried away. One would think I had implied
>that because I think the 77 is too sharp for a portrait lens,
>that by definition I want a coke bottle in a PK helicoid mount
>for portraiture. Nothing could be farther from the truth.
<snip>
> For me, a portrait _should_ please the subject. That is why
>I shoot portraits. If my subject is going to hate the picture, I
>am not going to waste film on producing it.
<snip>
>William Robb
>
>
>-
>This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
>go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
>visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
