Re: Lensbaby Sponsored Selective Blur Photography Competition

myemail@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
> You realize that all this "lensbaby" stuff is nothing but spam don't
you?
> 
> I've seen the samples photos of how this piece of crap optic-toy ruins
good
> glass.
> 
> Anyone with the least bit of rudimentary editing skills can replicate
these
> disastrous "lensbaby" results in post-processing, EXACTLY. (Zoom-blur on
subject
> focus, apply graduated gaussian blur, done. So simple there are even
plugins to
> do it in one step.) Why ruin the original photo by putting this
over-priced-crap
> toy on your lens? Keep the original photo intact and do these ridiculous
effects
> later if you must.
> 

OK - do this in Photoshop - replicate the complex aberration artefacts 
in this f2 shot from the 3G -

http://www.pbase.com/davidkilpatrick/image/79029143/original.jpg

Then take a look at a section of an actual part of the 10 megapixel Sony 
A100 image - remember this is a manually focused image taken at the full 
f2 aperture of a doublet LD cemented lens, and it's actually shot 
through cabinet glass as well:

http://www.pbase.com/davidkilpatrick/image/79029213/original.jpg

The lettering on the watch is define about as sharply as I would expect 
any 50mm f2 six-element lens to do under these conditions, and the 
artefacts with their coma-tail shapes and rainbows are beyond any quick 
Photoshop retouching or FX.

I have resisted testing the Lensbaby for two or three years, reckoning 
it was a complete gimmick and a rip-off price. Finally, I needed to do 
something for a magazine feature and asked for one to test. It's not 
going back, they get the money instead. I can make real money with this 
lens, no hassle - let me anywhere near food or jewellery or flowers.

David