>>4461654Wrong
>>4461621I was reading a book that covered this. I forget the title but it was something like photography for advertising, 1985. They discussed using soft focus/diffusion filters for portraiture to create a pleasing effect especially on portraits of women. The authors also talked about using even stronger filters than would normally be used for portraits to have an even stronger softening effect.
But maybe they did something else in that photo.
>>4462239Sad state of affairs. So many questions can be answered by just checking out a book or looking at magazine back issues. 1980 was not the dark ages, you can just go straight to original sources and see what they had to say.
