Re: [OM] Certainly a beaten subject already,

[Chuck Norcutt]

I'd agree there is some exaggeration but it doesn't hit you in the face. 
  Of course, there may be other distractions that prevent that.  :-)

Chuck Norcutt


Andrew Fildes wrote:
> Oh yes it does. I like to shoot close and with the 24-70mm on 5D2  
> towards the wide end.
> I like the effect - but an effect there most certainly is and it's  
> often not kind to gels with fat noses!
> It's not a fisheye effect but it can swell the face out. Short tele is  
> kinder.
> Here's one at 24mm on full frame - the lower face is exaggerated  
> (sensually, I hope).
> http://www.pbase.com/afildes/image/121388037
> (usual warnings apply...)
> Andrew Fildes
> afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> 
> 
> 
> On 03/03/2010, at 3:39 AM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> 
>> Actually, 20mm from a meter doesn't show much proboscis distortion at
>> all.  On a full frame it's enough to get almost 6 feet into the long
>> side of the frame and a nose is hardly prominent.  But from 1 foot  
>> or 6
>> inches... well, that's a different story.
>>
>> I'm not a wide angle portrait guy either.  I just used the portrait
>> notion to indicate the size of the field (upper body for 4/3) and a
>> notion of the DOF which was the main point of the post.
> 
-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/