AdaptedLenses
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
|
Rendering...
Just as van Eyck and van Gogh have their place in the history of art, Sigma Art and uncoated Non-AI Nikkors have their place in the world of lenses. There’s a time and a place for corner to corner sharpness, and with good editing and competent printing they can certainly create images that carry plenty of visual weight.
Other lenses carry a much different visual signature, often referred to “flaws”. But even that word is a misnomer here. It’s just a characteristic of a lens, and a competent artist will use the right brush, intentionally, to create the image he or she desires. Vignette is considered a flaw, but I find it adds to a lot of images, focuses the viewer. A well corrected, modern lens without vignette might be the wrong “brush” for a moody portrait with a central composition, it creates an image that is flawed and needs something added in post.
Ultimately I think discussions like this (not this one as it seems to be more subjective musings than objective statements) often go wrong when posters try to impart their shooting style and preferences unto everyone. As though we all must prefer either vanEyck or vanGogh. Apparently they think there is no room to appreciate both.
graytrekker wrote:
WARNING: PERSONAL COMMENTARY
Rendering?
I have been thinking about this word a lot lately. Just what is meant when someone discusses how a lens “renders” a scene, as in “I love the way this lens renders”. I have noticed that often this word is statistically associated with a lens that others have described as flawed – “not sharp at the edges”, “soft in the corners”, “bad coma”, and the like. Also, it is usually when discussing some vintage lenses being inferior to modern glass. This is often accompanied by statement such as, “modern hi res sensors show up the limitations of these older lenses – one needs modern lenses for the modern cameras to perform to their potential”. But I love the way that lens renders! So, is “rendering” a code word for a weak or flawed lens, and is someone trying to cover that up by saying they actually like its flaws?
This came to a head in my head with the recent announcement of the new Sony A7R IV and its 60+ MP FF sensor. The higher the resolution of the sensor, the more lenses have to keep pace. Look at the size, weight and price of modern lenses. However wonderful these hi res cameras are, for me, [and this is a personal opinion only], sometimes these photos look so clinically correct as to be lifeless and requires quite a bit of PP to add a compelling draw to them, other than curiosity to see how much detail I can see. Again – just my feelings only. I guess you could say I don’t like the way they "render"?
Concurrent with these thoughts, I am remembering some of my art classes from high school – a long, long time ago, when mastodons roamed the earth. I remember paintings typified by 15th Century artists, such, as Jan van Eyck. These paintings have incredible detail – to the point of requiring virtual “pixel peeping” with a magnifying glass. They are very “hi res”. A counterpoint to that is the Impressionist movement of the 19th Century. They usually have very blurred backgrounds (bokeh?), and even foreground can be somewhat ill defined (low res). At the time, many in the art community didn’t like the way these artists “rendered” their scenes. Of course now, they are recognized as great works of art. However, most would probably prefer to hang an impressionist painting on the wall at home over a van Eyck.
So in painting the world has moved from hi res to low res, but in photography, it has been the opposite. Is this art vs technology? In the end, I guess, let the modern day van Eycks out there chase the continuingly higher res sensors, and their exquisitely detailed representation of reality. That’s fine, I do not in the least begrudge them that. It is very valid. I will choose, however, to stay with my flawed vintage lenses and low res Df. I enjoy the experience so much more than my Sony that I want to keep using them, even though the Sony is higher res and produces technically better images. Therefore, I think I will try to develop a more “impressionistic” approach to photography. I am not sure that makes any sense or even just what that is yet, but I would certainly welcome a discussion on the matter with other like minded folks who “love the way these render”.
Thanks for your indulgence
Doug...Show more →
|
