Lensbaby Wizard

[reddishtiger]

Congratulations to Bev Harrison http://www.pbase.com/beverley_h

Some of her work is now being exhibited on the Lensbaby web site http://www.lensbabies.com/index.php (go to Galleries, Macro Kit, Botanicals)

great work, Bev!


Lee

[clickaway]

oooh Congratulations!

[halesr]

Bev, congratulations. I love 9 of 10. I had seen it on your pbase site. Absolutely beautiful.--Rene

[nickythurgar]

Yes, congrats, my friend - you ARE the master of the Baby!

[carole_s]

The queen of the Lensbaby and has been noted at last by the Lensbaby company!

[b]Big congratulations Bev were all rooting for you!

[beverley_h]

thanks guys, i don't know what to say!

[1designguy]

Just curtsy and extend your hand for a big kiss

I told you LB would love your images!!!

[camera0bug]

I haven't had a lensbaby yet.

I heard they make a lot of noise during the night
and do a lot of twisting and turning.

[alexphotos]

I haven't had a lensbaby yet.

I heard they make a lot of noise during the night
and do a lot of twisting and turning.

LOL

[sheils]

LOL!!

I haven't had a lensbaby yet.

I heard they make a lot of noise during the night
and do a lot of twisting and turning.

[bchalifour]

Could anyone explain to me what is the point of using a low-resolution plastic lens in front of an expensive camera?
Deteriorating any sharp and technically excellent image to make it look like a "lensbaby" shot is totally doable, if not easy. Trying to make a technically sharp image that can compete with any Nikon or Canon lens with a lensbaby might be more diificult...and then only then I may start to understand, who knows.
If the esthetic of the image is just the product of the optical defects of a lens, it is just another form of easy pictorialism along with the lightleak Holga or the blurred and vignetted Lomo esthetics.

[dkite]

Because some people like to have fun Bruno, no other reason than that.

[dougj]

@ beverley_h - congrats on the photo, it's nice to do something abstract like this

[beverley_h]

to bruno
i guess you either like it or you don't, i just happen to think its a fun little lens which i get lovely soft sensual images from, if everybody had the same visions through a lens do you not think it would become such a boring world?
well.. everyone is entitled to their own opinions and i respect that.... but please don't disregard my or anyone else's work with a lensbaby as substandard, i too can take technically sharp and perfectly composed pictures, however i like to discover and try anything new to make my images totally different and exciting, away from the norm shall we say?
we do it because it is fun and we like the effect, and i hope we are all open to new ideas, images dont have to be pin sharp front to back but with no soul. Equally, why does a user deliberatly degrade millions of pounds/dollars/yen worth of development into colour sensor design into producing a black and white image? Each to her or his own, and long may it be so!

regards
bev

[djwixx]

Could anyone explain to me what is the point of using a low-resolution plastic lens in front of an expensive camera?
Deteriorating any sharp and technically excellent image to make it look like a "lensbaby" shot is totally doable, if not easy. Trying to make a technically sharp image that can compete with any Nikon or Canon lens with a lensbaby might be more diificult...and then only then I may start to understand, who knows.
If the esthetic of the image is just the product of the optical defects of a lens, it is just another form of easy pictorialism along with the lightleak Holga or the blurred and vignetted Lomo esthetics.

Isn't using a filter, whether it's a UV, neutral density etc, doing the same thing, i.e. you're distorting the actual scene to achieve an effect?

Oh well, I suppose I will stick to creating my crap by whatever mechanism and accept that it's technically inept and wholly unacceptable to some.

GOOD JOB BEV.