• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

My World: Verkykerskop, Free State, South Africa - a panorama

This beautiful farm (a game farm, i.e. having only wildlife on it) is a couple of hours drive from us. A close friend and colleague owns a share in it, and it is a wonderful place to just "get out there".

It's extremely cold and dry here during the winter.

I really enjoy making landscape photographs using a fish-eye lens, where the composition ends up not looking like a fish-eye at all. The distortion produced is so often much more natural than what a wide rectilinear lens produces. What do you guys think - worthy to print large?

35642413400_a8db21d9d9_o.jpg


(Technical: Hand-held Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mk.II, M.Zuiko 8mm f/1.8 Fish-eye at f/4.0, ISO200.
Processed using the open-source RawTherapee running on the Arch Linux operating system )




Dawid,

This is especially interesting to me as it seems that the lens has cradled the two rocks in the center left and that's where the fisheye lens' 3D drawing is uniquely remarkable. This may be because the flattening of the fisheye sphere to make the image means there is not the same amount of detail represented at the periphery. So when it is "corrected" data there has to be "created" by extrapolation and the finer detail cannot be as rich as in the center which needs far less correction.

A 50 mm fisheye, when corrected would make for a very special portrait lens as it would so naturally provide more emphasis on the central core of the subject.

Would love to read your report of the print!

Asher
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Wolfgang Plattner

Well-known member
Hi
basically yes, but it is hard to judge on an internetsized file. So I miss details in the dark parts of the bushes and a little bit of fine details on the grass in the foreground.
At last it is your choice and that's what is really important.
Overall it is - to me - an impressive landscape, beautiful to look at.
 
Thank you for your feedback, Wolfgang!

The resolution is not up to LF film, or high-res 35mm camera standards, but it's a pixel-perfect sharp 20MP image processed with the sharpest RAW developer out there, so I think it will stand up to reasonable enlargement. Certainly more resolution than most of my 6x7cm film work with the Mamiya RB67!

I'm going to print one soon. I know the tones in the foreground are quite sombre, that that's on purpose. Any higher exposure there changes the balance and character of this sunset photograph.
 
Top