Some nice images there!
First review, I still really dislike Photo.net. Why in heaven's name
don't they have forward and back buttons? Going back to the index to get
to the next shot is really a pain, especially as it always takes it a
while to decide that I want the large image size and until then it's 3
clicks for each image.
I don't know if the gauzy look is intentional. I like it well enough for
at least a couple of them, but not for all. I don't imagine the 100VS
slides have such low contrast? Looking at the histograms, most of them
have the whole range of their brightness squeezed into 3/4 or less of
the range of brightness the files can contain. Adjusting the histograms
is like removing a haze in the images.
Given that I would have used a different presentation in tonal
range/contrast for most, I quite like the fuscias and the lupines. The
OOF in both foreground and background in the buds is different and I
like the abstract effect with just the buds to give context. I don't
much like the rose with the OOF petals and sharp center and leaves. The
leaves and white flowers shots remind me very much of effects I too
often try to get on film; ok, but without capturing what I saw and
wanted to convey. They are well executed, but don't grab me.
Moose
Wayne Culberson wrote:
>Okay, here are a few of the results from the first roll with the Series 1
>Vivitar 90/2.5.
>
>http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder.tcl?folder_id=366827
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|