P3D Sharpness

[Bob_Maxey@xxxxxxxxxxxx]

>>On a similar subject, in recent posts Bob Maxey seems to believe that
great
>>sharpness is a singularly great achievement in photography (to which I
say
>>to each their own but I'm greatful other standards seem to prevail in the
>>photographic world at large)...


When you get right down to it, it is personal. If you like blur, special
effects or something different, that's absolutely fine. It's your
photograph, and you must do it your way. I find no fault with that one bit.
I have preferences for me that might differ and that's fine too. I might
suggest that some use these techniques far to much, though.

As far as my belief that "great sharpness is a singularly great achievement
in photography...." as you put it, I think it is extremely important.
Sharpness and fine grain is something other photographers, manufactures,
etc. have constantly strived for over the years. If you read the literature
from lens, camera and film manufacturers from the beginning, it is apparent
that it is the most often cited advantage of their product. Leica and
Hasselblad did not make money by selling equipment that was not capable of
sharpness and contrast. It is how they sell equipment and it is what their
reputations are based on. When you get right down to it, I might say yes.
Creative techniques are fine, but NO manufacture is going to promote their
products without stressing how sharp, fine grained contrasty whatever their
lens or film is. I say these factors are important to me, but so does
everyone else.


There are some that believe that content is more important than technical
merits of the image. I do not always agree, but that's fine, too. I would
suggest that regardless of what someone says on this list about how great a
stereo photograph is, or how great some of the modern stereo cameras might
be, if they get images that are not sharp, exhibit poor contrast or other
such problems, they will complain about the camera. I  suggest that image
quality is extremely important to all of us. I suggest that you might use
your camera for creative images, but I know you will not tolerate film that
is extremely grainy, has terrible contrast or a camera that can't produce a
sharp image.


>> I'm just curious Bob, how are you judging sharpness? Resolution? MTF?
>>Accutance? Or does it just have to look "sharp" to you? Do you shoot your
>>photographs with high resolution macro lenses regardless of how they
>>perform in other ways and by other measures? Is purposeful motion blur
for
>>artistic reasons completely unsavory or intolerable to you? Is selective
>>focus in stereo photography ok? How about diffusion in portraiture?
>>
>>I'm genuinely curious...


I judge sharpness visually and with an eye loupe. I use fine grain film and
a quality camera. I just shot some more motorcycle photographs. I used
Kodachrome, my M4, and a tripod. Without looking at any technical
information about the film or the camera lens, I know that you would be
hard pressed to get a better 35mm slide in terms of sharpness. I do not
refer to the technical stuff about the equipment because I know there is
nothing better. So it is pointless to look further.


Extreme sharpness is what I prefer. That's why I prefer view cameras over
other formats. That's why I spent so much time working with large format. A
contact print from an 8 x 10 or larger format negative is simply sharper
than one from 35mm or medium format. Lots of factors make a photograph
sharp. contrast is a big factor as is resolution. Skill of the photographer
and processing also factor in. For me, sharpness is what's important. No, I
do not find any of the above factors "Unsavory" but I do have personal
preferences. In stereo, the entire scene must be sharp. Period. You might
have other views - fine, but they are not mine.

Some of the factors you mentioned are OK, but I was not taught to accept
them in stereo photography. One of the best stereo photographer I knew,
drilled into me the importance on DOF, proper exposure and fine grained
films. His images spoke for themselves. I still accept his ideas as I think
in stereo, generally, everything must be sharp. We humans see it that way,
after all.

Cheers,

RM