i couldn’t understand the comments i was getting that it wasn’t soft focus ..
this was processed on my laptop and during the voting i was able to see it on my pc which had temporarily karked it ..
on my laptop the soft focus is obvious but on the pc its not .. i was surprised that the image looked so different between both the computers ..
also the colours were totally different .. so yesterday i calibrated the laptop .. although the softness/sharpness didn’t change, the difference in colours before and after calibration was extreme ..
i bought this laptop less than two months ago, so advice to anyone who buys a laptop is to calibrate it when you get it home ..
often things arent so obvious without a comparison and then there's the matter of degree .. this is the image before the gaussion blur was applied to show that in comparison the challenge entry did look a lot softer ..
Statistics
Place: 25 out of 140 Avg (all users): 6.4275 Avg (commenters): 6.6364 Avg (participants): 6.0741 Avg (non-participants): 6.6548 Views since voting: 1860 Views during voting: 253 Votes: 138 Comments: 13 Favorites: 1 (view)
I knew it had to be you! No one else could come close to this calibre of macro :) It certainly is underrated, but there's no denying that this is off-the-chart fabulous!
The eyes and head are too sharp to call this soft focus and even though parts of the fly cross the 3rds lines it seems more centered in essence, as a composition.
But... The fly is *centered*... If you'd used "centered" as one of your 3 there'd be no argument with that. I can see where you have the eyes on 1/3 lines, so you call that ROT, but to my eye it's more of a centered photo... Also, I see the shallow DOF for sure, but the soft focus totally is not there, except inasmuch as there are OOF areas front and back; but the image itself is tack-sharp, incredibly detailed, about as far from *soft focus* as you can get...
Add photograph to your favorites
Add photographer to your favorites
Photographer found comment helpful.
