A couple of soft focus images, compared.

Reinhold · Feb 19, 2015

A buddy wasn't sure if he'd like the concept of using a soft focus lens as a landscape lens.

He mounted one of my 250mm f:4.2 Wollastons on his 4x5 Graflex to photo a covered bridge.
One was shot almost wide open, @ f:5.6, the other shot @ f:11.
Late afternoon sidelight, light hazy sky overhead.
His first reaction was that the f:5.6 negative was useless "mush" and almost threw it away.
After adjusting for printing contrast, here's how they compared...

He wasn't sure which one he favored, so he'd like your opinion.

Reinhold

www.re-inventedPhtoEquip.com

BrianShaw · Feb 19, 2015

f/11.

snapguy · Feb 19, 2015

I can't quite see the point of any soft focus with a subject like a covered bridge. An open meadow, yeah, but not this. Looks lomo, IMO.

Jim Noel · Feb 19, 2015

Wide open

MattKrull · Feb 19, 2015

Is he looking for an abstract photo or a realistic photo?

I mean, both have merits, but the soft focus appeals to me in a way the f11 does not. I'd actually like it if it was even softer and printed on a really textured paper. At that point I'd like it for the same reasons I like paintings in that style.

Covered bridges hold no nostalgia / emotional-appeal to me, so a nice sharp photo of one does nothing for me.

Trask · Feb 19, 2015

I'm rather with snapguy on this -- I don't think this covered bridge really lends itself to soft focus. It's the kind of subject that, in the setting shown, would seem to call for a sharp image so one can appreciate its form and construction. Soft focus of any kind for this subject just looks like the photographer failed to focus properly. So I can't say that I have a preference in this instance.

Then again, I'm not much of one for taking soft focus pictures, having only take a few -- of flowers. Don't ask me why I wouldn't want a nice sharp picture of flowers so I can appreciate their form and construction. Maybe I think my soft focus flowers are OK because they're in color, so the blend of colors becomes the point of the image, not the individual flowers per se.

Is that enough over-thinking for one post?

Fixcinater · Feb 19, 2015

I would prefer the wide open version if the bridge was the actual point of focus. As it looks on my screen, the sharpest point of focus is the grass/ground just behind the railing.

Sirius Glass · Feb 19, 2015

snapguy said:
I can't quite see the point of any soft focus with a subject like a covered bridge. An open meadow, yeah, but not this. Looks lomo, IMO.

+1

Alan Klein · Feb 19, 2015

Soft focus is good with women portraits. Anything that smoothes out their wrinkles and zits is great by them!

bvy · Feb 19, 2015

"Lomo" images may have soft corners or edges, but they will be sharp in the middle. This does not look lomo. At best, it looks like a zone plate image. At worst, it looks out of focus. I'm speaking of the f/5.6 image. The f/11 one has a pleasing softness to it already.

Sirius Glass · Feb 19, 2015

Alan Klein said:
Soft focus is good with women portraits. Anything that smoothes out their wrinkles and zits is great by them!

That or printing though layers of stockings to soften the print.

fotch · Feb 19, 2015

The f/11 one.

gone · Feb 19, 2015

This reminds me of the Cajun musician that was being interviewed on WTUL in New Orleans (great radio station, give it a listen to on the web sometime). He was asked what he would like for thanksgiving dinner, and he said "Probably crow or owl". When pressed to choose one, he said "I don't know. Like 'em both".

As for the two pics, I like 'em both.

But he DID miss the focus badly at f5.6.

scheimfluger_77 · Feb 19, 2015

I'm with fixinator on this one. I think the primary point of focus should be the mouth of the bridge. As a composition it has potential, just needs some more interpretation. Have your friend shoot more film of the subject.

Reinhold · Feb 19, 2015

Buddy thanks everyone for their comments.
He was fully aware that he missed the focus.
Meniscus lenses are not easy to focus, especially since he's new at it.
He was hoping that opinion would revolve around the overall aesthetics of heavy -vs- light diffusion.
Next time he promises to put his glasses on when focusing...

Reinhold

Roger Cole · Feb 20, 2015

1. I agree that the subject isn't really one for soft focus.
2. Agree about the missed focus.
3. All that said - I prefer the f/5.6 one for a reason I didn't see in skimming other replies. It is obviously a soft focus shot. It is apparent he did this on purpose and it can be judged as a soft focus photo. The f/11 one is just sharp enough to look like a "bad normal photo" - like his lens was just a bad one, or pretty dirty maybe, whatever.

Soft focus needs to be soft enough to make it clear that it's meant to be soft, not just irritatingly-close-to-but-not-quite sharp focus.

GKC · Feb 23, 2015

The bigger distraction is the structure to the left of the bridge, IMHO. As to the soft focus, the wide open version has a dream like quality I find appealing, although I would prefer to be able to read the sign on the bridge portal.

A couple of soft focus images, compared.

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency