Bring it on!

[JennyS]

Just to show I can take it as well as dish it out - which of these do you prefer, if at all and why? A test in 'constructive' criticism. Don't hold back as long as it's 'constructive'.

If it's a matter of 'taste' say so and explain why it doesn't appeal. If it's a matter of 'fact' explain what it is that you don't like and why.

I know which one I prefer and I know why.

Just out of interest what did the 'OH' have to say?

[acherontia]

Originally Posted by JennyS

Just out of interest what did the 'OH' have to say?

What a nice and surprising question

I didn't ask him!!! LOL Now I have and he agrees - moth blown out/ dung fly slightly noisy on the background.

We often bounce off each other on important stuff - ie re college/ printing/ exhibtion etc but not in this instance. It's very beneficial to 'bounce off' others opinions and we don't hold back on what we say. It rarely results in any offence as a non subjective artistic eye is invaluable.

Originally Posted by Jim Ford

Difficult to say with such small images. Hairs on the crops are not as sharp as you led me to expect!
I still stand by what I (and many others) say. The science of the capture of a single image on a typical DSLR sensor is simple and unambiguous - an unsharp image is created at the sensor. The camera may 'fiddle' electronically to create the illusion of sharpness before the image arrives on the storage media, but as it can only be a 'one size fits all' solution, it's generally considered to be undesirable.
To say that a DSLR produces sharp images out of the camera, after no internal sharpening, is equivalent to saying a CF card stores intermediate values between the binary 0s and 1s - it simply doesn't happen!
Jim

Talk a bout a dog with a bone!!You’re not going to let go until you ‘win’ are you???
According to my principles it’s not about winning or losing – but the exchange of information.

Now (again)........................

How do you define ‘sharpening’ ??? - a rearrangement of pixels? Yes I think so.

Contrast – ‘a rearrangement of pixels’ ?

Dodging and burning – ‘a rearrangement of pixels’ ?

Cloning – ‘a rearrangement of pixels’ ?

Using a brush/pencil with a Wacam Tablet – ‘a rearrangement of pixels’ ?

Life is never a one track path, Jim. ‘Sharpen’ is only a quick and makeshift tool that cuts out a more dedicated and time consuming method to attain artistic enhancement. There’s more than one way to skin a cat and other such saws.
'Sharpening' is a valid resource – but not the only method to make your images look good!

Originally Posted by Jim Ford

Depends what discipline we're talking about. In science (and digital imaging is a science) it's usual to say "in all cases".Jim

I always thought that astronomy was a science until they suddenly said that Pluto wasn’t a planet any more. To mention only one flawed scientific ‘fact’.

I'm very tired now (just a tad!) and have lots of photo work to do.
You think what you like as it seems to work for you ? I haven't looked at any of your work yet - I'd be interested if you have a link to some of it.

If you feel safer having perimeters (like Luton??) it's OK by me

Acher