>
> No captions yet on anything but the first image, but I'd be interested
> in comments as a work in progress
> <http://galleries.moosemystic.net/Garden04/index.htm>.
>
It's great to see both from the scan and processed images together - I
particularly like the final image you got from frame 26 by cropping in
hard. The grain really adds to the image.
> The first image shows shows the steps to the final image.
>
Hmm. Some slight of hand (or mouse) going on here Moose. Then final
image shows the bird from a different shot than the others. ;)
I think that you are getting much better results from your neg film
than I do from slide, particularly when there is contrast involved. I
just cannot get the shadow areas right and you avoid this to a great
extent using the neg film.
To show what I mean I've put up a scan here:
http://homepage.mac.com/royalljames/PhotoAlbum13.html.
Looking at the slide I have got it fairly close to the density range
after processing, but it comes out just so dark from the scanner - the
slide is on the dark side, but definitely shows more in the shadows,
which are less extreme than the scan. The histogram shows a full range
all the way to white, but massively weighted to the low end. I have had
to torture the image, using shadow/ highlight then curves to get it
anything like it should be.
This is why i was asking about the OM2n underexposing with old
batteries - was it the bright lights that the center weighted metering
adjusted for?
Your processing task of expanding the histogram to increase contrast
seems to work so much better.
James
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|