Jeff Keller wrote:
> I agree that the correction went too far.
As do I. The light is all wrong. If the sun is only just lighting the
peaks, how can the barn, etc. be lit so much brighter than the lower slopes?
As others have said, I see this shot as being about the sunrise first,
then about the foreground. Sure the foreground is blah, but it doesn't
have to look like it was pasted in from another shot at a different time
of day.
> This and some of the corrections
> Moose does to see how far he can push an image have a "picture postcard"
> llook that would probably sell well but looks too artificial to my eye.
>
You rang? Actually, I'd be a bit ashamed to have posted the corrected
shot in the tutorial.
Here are a couple of versions that I think better capture the sunrise
feeling while bringing the foreground out of the blahs
<http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/Others/052206_big.htm>.
> Calypso imaging has had a large Galen Rowel print in its lobby that I always
> look at when I'm in there. Galen exaggerated the colors of the high desert
> landscape on the eastern side of the Sierras. Having often seen the real
> landscape, the image doesn't look real. However the colors are quite muted
> in real life. The exaggerated version looks like what someone who loves the
> country would see in their mind.
>
Galen is said to have claimed that he never used filters to enhance his
colors. A lot of folks say that's impossible. I guess the secret may
have gone to the grave with him.
> The Adorama tutorials have been very useful for me even if I wouldn't push
> the image as far.
>
I think the technique in this tutorial is a useful one, although I used
one I'm more comfortable with for my version. I do think it was a poor
choice of shot for what she wanted to illustrate.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|