# WARNING : Blurred photos from Japan



## ndroo (Apr 22, 2006)

Did all photos from my trip to Japan using a Lensbaby. Some said I'm crazy, some says they're good. What do you think?

HERE


----------



## Arch (Apr 22, 2006)

i'm on the 'they're good' side...... you got some great shots and im i'm a fan of the LB so im glad you used it for these.... great work :thumbup:


----------



## 2framesbelowzero (Apr 22, 2006)

i like many of them..especially the girls shopping and the outdoor stuff.:thumbup:


----------



## Fate (Apr 22, 2006)

Great shots and i love your website set up. What do you use for that flash website?>


----------



## spako (Apr 22, 2006)

I really like them! great shots! and great website!


----------



## ndroo (Apr 22, 2006)

Everyone, thanks. I use imagevuex for the gallery.


----------



## THORHAMMER (Apr 22, 2006)

I think there all good shots, however i cant look at more than 3 or 4 LB pics in a row without having a huge urge to be seasick.. lol


----------



## danalec99 (Apr 22, 2006)

Lovely work with the LB! :thumbup:


----------



## ndroo (May 7, 2006)

Thorhammer, sorry for making you puke. Hehe. Thanks

Danalec99, thanks


----------



## Paul_the_6th (May 18, 2006)

The pics are great, the lens baby really gives some of the shots alot of power and significance - BUT - with many of the shots, the lensbaby takes away the impact the image would have had without the blur. 

Well composed, interesting and individual images but the lensbaby does become slightly overwhelming & undermines several images.

Keep up the good work! 

How was japan? I really fancy it but I've never got round to doing any research on it.


----------



## FOTO-GRAFFIC (May 18, 2006)

ndroo said:
			
		

> Did all photos from my trip to Japan using a Lensbaby. Some said I'm crazy, some says they're good. What do you think?
> 
> HERE


 
Can I play *Devils Advocate* here. I was bought up from my early days in photography to always - always get the best neg you can get. correct exposure - sharp over the area you want to show etc.etc. Once you have the best neg/image you can then do anything you want with it. Now i have nothing against the lensbaby but it is a gimmick - it's like the filters in Photoshop - great that they are everyone goes mad with them when they first start using PS and it ruins some very good images - difference is they can always go back to the originals - with lensbaby you cannot.
I do like your images but would have preffered to have seen them without some of the distortion the gadget has produced which now cannot be corrected. There are some fine examples of cityscapes and one in particular - The next train, but if you look closely the real impact point of the image is the trackside sign - if you had used a post image package then you can determin exactly what you want to blur/defocus and to what extent.
Please, none of this is meant as critisism as I strongly believe in the fact that an image is nothing untill it reacts with the viewer and it is that reaction and the emotion it brings that determins the success of an image -therefore everyone will see an image differently.
I do like your web site and would like to see some more of your work but without the gadgetry attached to the camera.:thumbup:


----------



## yoursatellite (May 18, 2006)

regardless of the method.....tons of character.  nice pics.


----------



## danalec99 (May 18, 2006)

I see where you are coming from, but allow me to  be _Devil's Advocate's_ Devil's Advocate. 



			
				FOTO-GRAFFIC said:
			
		

> Now i have nothing against the lensbaby but it is a gimmick - it's like the filters in Photoshop - great that they are everyone goes mad with them when they first start using PS and *it ruins some very good images* -


What if the creator is content with the 'filtered' and/or the 'lensbabied' version? 





> difference is they can always go back to the originals - with lensbaby you cannot.


What if one does _not_ want to? What if the creator made all the creative decisions while he/she was looking through the viewfinder?


----------



## JohnMF (May 18, 2006)

i like the colours you've got in the street ones


----------



## mentos_007 (May 19, 2006)

I think you are not crazy.. you got some really great images!


----------



## FOTO-GRAFFIC (May 19, 2006)

danalec99 said:
			
		

> I see where you are coming from, but allow me to be _Devil's Advocate's_ Devil's Advocate.
> 
> What if the creator is content with the 'filtered' and/or the 'lensbabied' version?
> 
> ...


 
You are of course correct in making that assumption as the creator/author of the image used the device knowing what it would do. My worry/concern is that this takes something away from the creator being able to change the effect at a later time. I have gone back to images that I took 10 & 15 years ago and re-worked them in a different style to bring out a different aspect of what I was trying to achieve in the first instance. That siad I defend the right of anyone to use what devices they like to achieve the effects they want to convey - but when the Lensbaby falls from grace - as it will just like some of the effects that we had in the days of wet hands and feeling around in the dark, then what of these images.
Some of the truely great photographs and photographers have used an image several times and bought out different characteristics which appeal to a different audience. I cannot argue (nor will I) against your premise here but only wish to point out that it restricts the creator and in doing so reduces the use of such an image.


----------



## danalec99 (May 19, 2006)

I think you view LB as another fancy filter.
LB to me, is a lens. Would we consider un-fishing a fish-eyed image? Or would we consider un-holga-ing an image from a Holga?



			
				FOTO-GRAFFIC said:
			
		

> it restricts the creator and in doing so reduces the use of such an image.


 I agree, but _only_ if it is considered as a filter.


----------



## allyv (May 19, 2006)

I quite like them, not really my cup of tea.


----------



## ndroo (Dec 12, 2006)

Everyone, thanks for the comments. Sorry for disappearing for quite a while, life's been busy.

Well as for the debate weather LB is fun/good etc, guess it's up to individuals. I am a big fan of Lomo cams and Holgas. I've heard tons of people asking me why not just try Photoshop my normal photos. To me, it's the fun and satisfaction I derive from the cameras/lense and not on my PC.


----------



## ndroo (Dec 12, 2006)

FOTO-GRAFFIC said:
			
		

> My worry/concern is that this takes something away from the creator being able to change the effect at a later time.


 
Good that there's discussion going on about this. Well, to me, when I know what I want my photos to look like (when I use these 'weird' lenses/filters), I will never want to go back to a 'normal' photo. So the capability to change the effect will not be an issue to me


----------



## zombiekilla (Dec 12, 2006)

I love them! great job!!!


----------



## holmesfoto (Dec 27, 2006)

I am not a Lensbaby fan (photos are just looking like somebody has tried some photoshopping first time). After seeing these fotos I have to change my mind. This effect is giving so much speed to these fotos.


----------



## ndroo (Dec 27, 2006)

zombiekilla & holmesfoto, thanks a lot. glad you like em


----------



## MrMatthieu (Dec 27, 2006)

I think you have some very nice shots, and some other are just correct and saved by the effect given  by the lens baby.

But I have to say that some of your shot are really convincing to me.
So convincing that I am looking forward to buy one of this lensbaby. Which one you use 3G, 2 or basic one.
Is it easy to use because I have not seen pictures nice like yours with this lens, so I just wonder if it nit too difficult to use this.

Matthieu


----------



## becmaclean (Dec 27, 2006)

I'm with Thorhammer, why can't I look at blurred images without getting dizzy:lmao: ??

I especially like the "Rainy day in the park" shot. As with many lensbaby shots, it has a dream-like feeling. Are those cherry blossom trees in the background? 

I love them all but have to admit that some of them would probably have been spectacular shot with a normal lense setup ie: the grass is greener.

Beautiful though...I'm very jealous, wish I had the opportunity to go somewhere as amazing


----------



## Mithlondor (Jan 8, 2007)

Yummys on Sticks is a fantastic shot in my humble opinion


----------



## ndroo (Jan 8, 2007)

MrMatthieu said:


> I think you have some very nice shots, and some other are just correct and saved by the effect given by the lens baby.
> 
> But I have to say that some of your shot are really convincing to me.
> So convincing that I am looking forward to buy one of this lensbaby. Which one you use 3G, 2 or basic one.
> ...


 
Thanks. Just like on a Lomography trip, these shots were mostly taken in a snapshot style, no fancy composition etc. I use LB2 and don't see myself getting a 3G one until they come out with something more interesting. LOL



becmaclean said:


> I'm with Thorhammer, why can't I look at blurred images without getting dizzy:lmao: ??
> 
> I especially like the "Rainy day in the park" shot. As with many lensbaby shots, it has a dream-like feeling. Are those cherry blossom trees in the background?
> 
> ...


 
Thanks. Yeah those are cherry blossom trees 



Mithlondor said:


> Yummys on Sticks is a fantastic shot in my humble opinion


 
Thanks. THat makes me hungry when I look at it


----------



## just x joey (Jan 22, 2007)

i HATE lensebabies, it makes my eyes water haha


----------



## zaramuni (Jan 25, 2007)

I really liked your pictures! I want a lens baby now!


----------



## chroix (Feb 2, 2007)

I like them. The pictures of people in the cities eally work. The others are marginal.


----------



## Taceas (Feb 13, 2007)

I realize this is another FrankenThread, but I can't see any images on the Portfolio page. Am I missing something?


----------



## _Becka_ (Feb 26, 2007)

I really like the ones of the people/city, not to sure on the others but you have some great photos there.


----------



## ndroo (Mar 20, 2007)

Thanks for the comments, everyone



Taceas said:


> I realize this is another FrankenThread, but I can't see any images on the Portfolio page. Am I missing something?


 
Huh? It should be visible ... you have Flash installed on your PC?


----------



## digital flower (Mar 27, 2007)

Interesting discussion on LBs. I like your photographs I think the lens works very well here.


----------



## RMThompson (Mar 29, 2007)

Great shots + Lens Babies = Not-so-great shots.

The pictures are amazing, great colors, composition, etc, but the LB effect ruins a great many of them, especially when a LOT of these effects can be achieved in Photoshop. I agree that it looks like someone with limited Photoshop skills (like myself) messed with all these pictures.

Trust me, I am no purist, almost every one of my shots includes some about of blur and color correction, but the lens baby just limits EVERYTHING to me.

On the other hand it DOES add something to SOME shots like "uncle" and "up close"


----------

