Chris Barker wrote:
> I found this difficult to assess, Moose, because the settings change only
> when moving between the boxes or back to the original. It would not change
> on moving the cursor to the background. Therefore checking differences on
> the bottom row was confused by having to move back across the top row to the
> original.
>
As you know, several others complained of the same thing. I don't find
it really hard to flip between individual images, although sometimes I
have to move the cursor out around the boxes.
About all I can say in my defense is:
- I reached the limits of my meagre HTML talents coming up with this design.
- Nobody else here is doing anything close. Of course, how many want to
show multiple roll over comparisons? :-)
> But 1, 2 and 3 seem to be over-sharpened; 4 looks slightly blurred, but
> deepened in tone, 9 seems to be a sharper version of 4. I rather fancy 4 as
> a result, but accept that 9 might well be the universal favourite.
>
Yup, 9 is the people's choice.
> I like the scenery you have depicted in most of your shots, by the way. From
> talking of logging, it was a pleasant surprise to see so much green and water.
>
I don't know much of anything about Maine logging practices. I've been
around many miles of logging roads in that part of the state and the
ones pictured aren't atypical. I suppose much of that area was clear cut
some time ago and much of the smaller flora has recovered. In one area
along the river, quit a few of the larger trees were tagged. I assumed
this meant they were selectively logging individual trees when they got
big enough. A mighty pretty place.
Moose
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|