Of course clarity isn't always necessary, but there are certainly occasions when it is required. (I don't think I'll last long if I start sending soft photos of cars to my auto clients.) Good equipment is necessary to deliver everything that a photographer has to do. And better equipment -- as in the K-5 over the K-7 -- can expand one's reach. Paul On Jan 26, 2011, at 10:50 PM, Steven Desjardins wrote:
> Most of these images rely on an element of clarity in a diffuse field. > Awesome shots, BTW, I really like that face and the wharf/dock. > > On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 7:16 PM, Bruce Walker <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 11-01-26 1:37 PM, Larry Colen wrote: >>> >>> On Jan 26, 2011, at 7:04 AM, Bruce Walker wrote: >>>> >>>> On 11-01-25 7:47 PM, Larry Colen wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Better equipment won't make you a better photographer, and one can argue >>>>> that equipment that is too good at doing everything automatically can >>>>> interfere with you becoming a better photographer. And while a good >>>>> photographer can get great pictures with almost any gear, especially if >>>>> you >>>>> aren't overmuch worried about minor details like sharpness, the right >>>>> equipment can allow almost anyone to get clearer photos under difficult >>>>> lighting situations. >>>> >>>> That's not a persuasive argument for either side, Larry. Achieving >>>> "clear photos" has little or nothing to do with "great pictures". Clear >>>> photos are desirable in technical manuals though. >>> >>> While there are exceptions to every artistic rule, unless your name is >>> Knarf, clarity is a necessary but not sufficient condition for a great >>> picture. >> >> I beg to differ, and offer just a few from an innumerable list of excellent >> images with little or no clarity. These shots are not mine--all taken from >> Flickr ... >> >> http://www.flickr.com/photos/booleansplit/3894430548 >> http://www.flickr.com/photos/minebilder/208387780 >> http://www.flickr.com/photos/bilbert/3134678910 >> http://www.flickr.com/photos/ingynoo/4413415496 >> http://www.flickr.com/photos/bilbert/5179173922 >> http://www.flickr.com/photos/nikolaborissov/4119473858 >> http://www.flickr.com/photos/silentrunning/3609986922 >> >> And don't forget Christine Aguila's wonderful shot from the 2009 PDML Annual >> (pg 9). Very low contrast, foggy, barely discernable bare trees in a >> snowscape. Yet gorgeous; one of the most striking shots in the book. >> >> Too much clarity can spoil a shot. Very often you need to hide as much as >> you reveal; submerge it in the shadows, unsaturate, untint or lower its >> contrast, or defocus it; all reduce clarity. >> >> Clarity: not necessary. >> >> -bmw >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> [email protected] >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. >> > > > > -- > Steve Desjardins > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
