Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: Aurora pic - update

Subject: [OM] Re: Aurora pic - update
From: Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 16:33:54 -0400
Ah, the lighter version works for me.  I'd leave the foreground as it is 
now.  I think I'd still prefer a bit less saturation on the sky but it's 
your picture.

Chuck Norcutt

Guillaume Remy wrote:
> Thanks for your answers, 
> About the foreground: actually, I was thinking about something like that, but 
> couldn't make my
> mind up about lighter or darker. Lighter seemed unnatural to my eyes. Darker 
> and I felt like
> having 1/3 of the frame lost in the black outerspace... check the updated 
> versions:
> original http://homeusers.brutele.be/guillaumme_remy/_tmp/index.html
> lighter http://homeusers.brutele.be/guillaumme_remy/_tmp/01.html
> darker http://homeusers.brutele.be/guillaumme_remy/_tmp/02.html
> About the sky; this is now a bit less saturated... some further advice ?
> 
> Guillaume
> 
> ---
> 
> From: hiwayman@xxxxxxx (Walt Wayman)
> Subject: [OM] Re: Aurora pic - your comments ?
> Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 17:21:30 +0000
> 
> I tend to agree.  Being an ol' farm boy raised amongst and tending to a 
> herd of over 250 polled Herefords, I was far more interested in and 
> distracted by the mysterious foreground, trying to figure out if the 
> darker objects were a cow or two or, as it now appears, a feed rack and a 
> hay wagon.  I think either lighter or darker would be more better.  The 
> sky's gaudy, but I kinda like gaudy sometimes.
> 
> Walt
> 
> --
> "Anything more than 500 yards from 
> the car just isn't photogenic." -- 
> Edward Weston
> 
>  -------------- Original message ----------------------
> From: Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
>>Nice but I have difficulty with the foreground.  I think it should be 
>>either darker or lighter.  As it is, the barely visible foreground 
>>details keep drawing my attention from the sky and I'm straining to 
> 
> see 
> 
>>what's there.   I suggest that you either make it darker such that I 
>>can't see much of any detail or else bring the foreground brightness 
> 
> up 
> 
>>a bit so I don't have to strain to see what's there.
>>
>>The sky might also benefit from being less saturated and a bit more 
> 
> real 
> 
>>looking but that I can't say for sure.
>>
>>Chuck Norcutt
>>
>>Guillaume Remy wrote:
>>
>>>Hello all,
>>>
>>>Being mainly a lurker on this list, I'm submitting today my first 
> 
> pic !
> 
>>>http://homeusers.brutele.be/guillaumme_remy/_tmp/index.html
>>>Taken with OM4, Tamron 28/2.5 on Fuji Sensia 200, this is the 
> 
> result from a 
> 
>>Moose-like treatment
>>
>>>from 2 different exposures...
>>>Any comments welcome...
>>>
>>>Guillaume
>>
> 
> 
>       
> 
>       
>               
> ___________________________________________________________________________ 
> Yahoo! Mail réinvente le mail ! Découvrez le nouveau Yahoo! Mail et son 
> interface révolutionnaire.
> http://fr.mail.yahoo.com
> 
> ==============================================
> List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
> 
> 


==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz