These norms, even ones that are focused on supposed “perfection”, give rise to contrarians and rebels those who like to break free from what is widely accepted and perpetuated as normal and in one way or another pursue the abnormal, or the imperfect. Then again, there will always be a place for people liking something different. I’m sure you can think of examples how modern society has defined “perfect” to be normal in a way that is of unnecessary detriment to the alternative…? Bizarrely these opinions, once taken on in volume can somehow – despite all logic – become the norm. I think sometimes people just get hypnotised by general consensus – everyone else seems to think “this” is good, so never mind the “other”. To my mind this is something that sometimes seems to get forgotten. I suppose in mathematical terms I’m talking about the mode, rather than the mean average, but you get my point. Really, more often than not, they are just the thing that most appeals to the most amount of people for the most reasons. In actuality, the things in society that are widely regarded as perfect, are – in my opinion – better regarded as the average. One mans trash is another’s treasure being the well known adage that sums this up nicely. The problem with defining flaws in any subject where there is even the remotest chance of subjective opinion affecting the issue, is that personal taste gets in the way. Perfect can be defined as “without flaws” but to have something that has no flaws you must first define what constitutes a flaw. I think before I get into discussing perfection in lenses specifically, it might be valuable for me describe what I see as perfection by definition. 5 The also Imperfect Leitz Summarit 50mm f1.5.3 The misinterpretation of incompatible as a cause of disharmony.But which is the right character? Should we pursuing perfection in our lenses character, or imperfection? And is imperfection in lenses actually a potential source of perfection in the photographic outcome? Of course, outside of these extreme examples, it can be said that all lenses have a character of some sort, and when buying a lens it’s that character we are choosing. Then there’s the use of antique petzvel or aerial reconnaissance lenses to create crazy swirling bokeh. Extreme examples of this are the lomo crowd and their plastic lenses. Though despite this, in recent years there has been somewhat of a trend for the opposite, a trend for using lenses that impart an arguably imperfect character on to an image. Perfect vision, or perfect eyes are always going to be an advantage in seeing, and many would argue the same can be said for the lens of cameras. Lenses are like the eyes of our cameras, they don’t process information, they just transmit it to what’s behind.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |