Nude I

The image being completely out of focus doesn't work for me. You could get away with it if there was some kind of motion visible but this is a very static subject. Do you have another version with at least something in focus?

Nope. That was deliberate. But I heard you.

Subtle and soft. OK by me.

@mfohl - Yeah, that was what I was shooting for, but I can appreciate the counter-argument. On the soft versus sharp focus line, I find myself continually siding towards the softer side of things. In fact, I fell in love with film recently specifically because of that glorious grain and the ability to not capture hair follicles in such scientific detail. I avoid T-Max and similar film for exactly that reason, and stick with Tri-X, Ultrafine Extreme, and similar films. If this were the 70s I'd probably be dolloping petroleum jelly on all my lenses.

Honestly, I am still doodling and experimenting with photography. I haven't settled into one particular area and style that I exclusively dedicate my time to, and I say this with a certain amount of discomfort; I'd like to focus on one area and master it, but I keep stumbling upon happy accidents and getting sidetracked. Thank God I don't have to make money doing this.

I bought a 100 feet of Ultrafine Extreme... i hope I like it.

Love your Art.

@Greg Heath Thank you.

I’ve heard it said that Ultrafine is cheap(er) film because of its low silver content. This makes sense to me, given that it does not capture a lot of fine detail. But, speaking for myself, I have found this pleasing in cases where I do not wish to capture certain details (like skin imperfections) particularly in the mids. It can render a minimalistic, sketch-like effect, and for that reason I, personally, like it, though I am looking closer at Tri-X these days though it is more expensive than Ultrafine.

There was a fellow who did a lengthy “blind” taste test of several films using a set of pre-defined categories. Ultrafine came out on top for him. Pretty interesting video — I’ll see if I can find it.

I would be interested to hear how you are using Ultrafine and whether or not you like it.

@Greg Heath https://petapixel.com/2017/08/26/ultimate-guide-every-bw-iso-400-35mm-film-market/

I have a late-in-life fondness for soft focus, blur, and out of focus. I think it came from a time when I stopped photographing for a time and took up drawing and painting. Painters can do and say so much with a minimum of detail. It's mostly about form for them. So, I get what it is you're doing here. Do more. Take it somewhere even farther. Try making it more about the light perhaps.

@artonpaper Thank you for your words. I am definitely out of sync with the follicle-capturing sensors of today. I find it interesting that people then take those captures and add skin-softening in photoshop. I am sure I am missing something...

@Dusty Negative – Having spent many years photographing thousands of circuit boards and other electronics parts, I then opened a headshot business. This, in the heyday of analogue, people wanted commercially oriented portraits, sharp, but flattering. I tried all sorts of things, and in the end, I shot sharp, diffused a little in the printing, and then employed the use of a good retoucher, one who worked with dye and bleach, and the occasional scalpel –– very expensive. Now high pass skin softening will retain certain detail while softening other detail.
Whatever delivers the results we want is OK with me.