Skin retouching is an illegitimate child, to say the least. It's so easy to make it look like a pizza or an extra from "300". I think it's because the human face is so dominant a model in our hind brain, the second something's unnatural about it, it flags up warnings that something's wrong. Sod's law also means that when I'm doing an image restoration job the folded creases will always, always run across the face. Phantom, have you tried Raw Therapy? RawTherapee Blog
good man Kpone.i'll give that a blast and see how it goes. just have to wait on my new camera coming, havent had much cash lately so I got another cheap Nikon.got a D5100 but spent the money saved on some new glass including a F1.8 50mm lens.
I had CS5 when I had a D3000 and that took in its NEF files ok but when I got the D7000 which I have now it wouldn't take the files but I got CS6 a few days later which did take then fine so I never looked into it really .
Very underrated lens, the 50 1.8. Even by me. For years it languished wrapped in chamois in the bottom of my kit bag, until I realised I was shooting everything with a superzoom pulled back to 28mm, dug it out and had a whale of a time.
Could try straightening the horizon (the verticals are off on the building) + try bumping the mid-tones up a bit to make th building stand off the sky a bit more?
I was thinking of the 1.4 but then when I seen a recent test on the differences I realised that I could get away with a 1.8 and also save a few quid too.Also watched this which helped me decide on having a 50mm as an extra lens his other vids are worth watching too.
Im wanting to do some videos with it too so that was another reason.seen this class video I was talking to the guy that made it on vimeo and he was saying he used a 50mm 1.8 for nearly every shot.
The edge definition on the 1.4 means you need to keep the aperture above f4 anyway which renders it pointless in my view. It's the 1.8 every time for me. The original kit lens.
I've got one of these. Which believe it or not is one of the sharpest portrait lenses I've ever used. Somebody much cleverer than me once explained it but it was way out of my league, but apparently, in order to do soft focus well, the lens needs to have almost preternatural acuity. So, when I turn the soft focus off, it turns into a glass Stanley knife. Apart from my 50, everything else is zoom.
Yep it's a Canon. One of the oldest lense in the range. If they still do it. Wasn't dear either. I used it at a wedding a couple of years ago and was doing head and shoulder noddies across the dining room and you could see the hairs in their noses. Mind you, for anything other than portraits, its a bastard to focus properly and hunts like Arthur's dog, but it was designed to do faces and its served me well.
The 50mm f/1.8 is a great lens to take travelling cos its cheap as chops so doesnt matter as much if it gets dropped. But the 50mm f/1.4 is more than just 1/3 of a stop gained. The front element is much much bigger so you get a better Tstop (not an Fstop) which is the true light transfer of a lens. Plus there's less distortion, the coatings give less artifacts, its sharper, faster focusing, quieter ..... and so on If you get the chance to try one, I'd recommend it. It's worth the extra cost
Yeah much better . I kinda rushed this 1 throu camera raw just to put it up as I wasn't that fond init but its growing on me now its straightened up . Cheers fella
