Yeah, I thought so. I had to adjust the color quite a bit to get the
almost violet color out of the side of the mountain, the distant
mountains and the dirt in front of the church. Notice the sky became an
actual blue. The problem isn't just lack of saturation, which I did
increase, but also color balance. I did significant color balance
changes in both mid and dark tones on the church and mid tones on the
landscape. Notice how much browner the dirt, mountains, etc. are in the
adjusted images. It may well be that this is what it actually looks like
and our eyes adjust to what we 'know' common things look like. Whether
that's the case or not, you want the slides to look normal.
I think the idea others have suggested of trying different, more
saturated, films is a good one. It also appears that the highest
blue/low UV light is throwing off the color balance. Other films may be
better or worse in this regard, but I suspect none will cure it by
themselves. I think Bill Pearce's advice is probably very good:
"I ALWAYS use both hood and filter. I NEVER depend on a UV filter, as it just
isn't enough. UV filters don't remove all UV, they just attenuate it to a
greater or lesser degree depending on brand. I always use an 81A (the Oly
filter, of which I have several, is an 81C, not a great deal different).
This will keep the blue under control, but it remains under some circumstances."
I just tried viewing the jpegs on my screen through filters. I realize many things are compounded and possibly confounded by the journey through a scanner and the particular phosphors on my screen, but the results seem somewhat illuminating. I can hardly see any difference between the UV and 1A, as might be expected since my screen doesn't put out much light is the area they filter. The 81A made a definite difference to the good, particularly in the distant mountains. It didn't go nearly as far as the photoshop adjustments, but went in the same general direction. I don't have an 81C. An 85 goes too far yellow.
If it were me, I'd be sure to take along an 81A or 81C filter and try it out on
at least a few shots.
Moose
Wayne Culberson wrote:
Hi Moose,
Yes, the changes you made in photoshop are much improved, and are more like
what I remember. The problem is, the slides look like my scans, and it is
the slides I want to try to improve.
You are right about the lack of vivid colors in these two examples. It seems
vivid colors are found mostly in people's clothing, or maybe a few other
places like the public markets. Maybe I will look for a couple examples of
that to put, but it may be a day or two. But sometimes they come out with
the same problem.
Thanks,
Wayne
----- Original Message -----
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <waynecul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 10:39 PM
Subject: Re: [OM] Altitude problem examples
Are these scans representative of the colors of the slides? How do shots
of things that actually have saturated colors in them come out?
There are a lot of places on the earth that just look flat and washed
out. These shots don't look all that different than my memory of some of
those places, although the color balance seems a bit off.
Anyway, I've done a little juggling in Photoshop. Is this more like what
you remember? Even if not, it shows that you can perk things up a lot.
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|