>>3771854>she looks like shes covered in fur.Humans literally are.
>hideous pictureNo shit.
>digitalfags are grotesqueFilm faggots do the same fucking thing when they scan in and sharpen their images. This garbage has nothing to do with film vs digital or sharp lenses. Cheap lenses will show hair on someone's face, it's all a matter of how it's rendered in the final image. Shit processing will sharpen the hairs.
A good lens with no sharpening results in sharp images without any sharpENed hair/pores.
>>3771910>It's exactly why the claim that it's overly processed with AI is moot.The ear looks weird as fuck.
It's still an over processed garbage image. I don't give a shit, cameras fucking over process shit unless you go in and change everything to produce good photos. Photography is more than $2000 camera + ISO/Shutterspeed/Aperture.
You know literally nothing based on optics and true facts. You are brainwashed by falsehoods shilled by idiots.
