Is it or is it not a problem?

Is it or is it not a problem when somebody enters your photo at the bottom right corner? I definitely cannot decide. It might as well be interpreted as dynamism.

Un-sharp is clever

Normally, I like sharpness in my pictures. The Carl Zeiss Jena Flectagon 20mm f4 I was testing with my M42 adapter on the Pentax K10D turned out to be particularly unsharp - to an extent unimaginable.
Closer pictures are however sharper.
That is how the idea of this double world with the blurred underworld of humans and the sharpness of abstract signs above it occurred to me. Also, this seems to be a picture that works much better in black and white.



I have seen something very similar by Zoltán Vancsó, where things you would normally not compose in one picture fit quite well together. Like in this picture, for example

It may well be that technical perfection is a subjective term, a good picture always depends on what you make of your tools. (How clever, uhh.)

400 ISO becomes black and white film grain

I made this photo with the 20mm Flektagon which is not particularly sharp (see my other post about this). I turned this photo grayscale, underexposed it some, and put some extra light (Fill Light), and finally pushed up contrast. The result is a lot of film grain.

Also look at other BW photos I created this way: Black and White

I can black and white

... if I turn the photo grayscale and add some extra contrast.


Post to del.icio.us

Underexpose the sky

I tampered with the exposure in Lightroom, underexposed this picture about 0,8 as compared to "natural", and also put some contrast because the lens I used (the Carl Zeiss Jena Flectagon 20mm f4) is extremely soft and contrast is said to come in handy when a picture is soft.
The reason for putting the picture here is because the sky became pixelated to the eye in the smaller versions: there are amorphous blocks of dark blue.