Hmm ... I don't see halos around Moose's images but I can see a halo around
the image Walt oversharpened.
I think the ugly bokeh is a trade-off Moose often has to live with. He likes
the very wide range zoom that isn't especially fast. Some of the vegetation
in the S.F. Bay area easily provides really ugly bokeh.
I see a lot of Moose's images as an example of how far a photo can be pushed
and would almost always opt for his regular comment ... something in
between.
I think I'm missing something though. The software "print preview" that is
supposed to do a better job showing what the printed image will look like
always looks further away from what I see in the actual print than the
normal image on the screen.
-jeff
----Original Message Follows----
From: "Bill Pearce" <bs.pearce@xxxxxxx>
Not to jump on things, but I agree with Walt, and I expect a T shirt in the
mail.
It should be noted that different levels of sharpening are needed for
different uses. I apply a boatload for images to be printed on the offset
press. Those levels look bad on the screen, and in a inkjet print. It seems
to me that the least looks best on a monitor, something that seems strange,
considering how monitors can turn the greatest photo to crap.
Bill Pearce
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|