Those look mighty fine to me.
Chuck Norcutt
C.H.Ling wrote:
> Even with RAW one can still have some images need no special adjustment
> except simple +/- compensation, I consider these are direct outputs, for
> example:
>
> http://www.accura.com.hk/OM/OMC/5D2_01/IMG_D002.html
> http://www.accura.com.hk/OM/OMC/5D2_01/IMG_D010.html
> http://www.accura.com.hk/OM/OMC/5D2_01/IMG_D013.html
>
> But in many cases additional adjustment is required for my taste.
>
> C.H.Ling
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Chuck Norcutt"
>
>> I'm pretty sure all the Canyon users here shoot raw. I'd be hard
>> pressed to tell you what the direct output from Canyon (a JPEG utilizing
>> some set of processing parameters) looks like. I couldn't tell you if
>> it was good or bad.
>>
>> Chuck Norcutt
>>
>>
>> Ken Norton wrote:
>>>> Thanks for watching, Phx. I'm not a fancy guy but sometimes just can't
>>>> stand
>>>> the direct output from Canyon :-)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Whenever I've said something like that, the bricks fall down on me.
>>>
>>> Now I just ignore it altogether. It is obvious that just like MP3 audio
>>> files being accepted as "great", the dumbing down of the masses has
>>> occurred
>>> and the Canyon "look" is accepted as "great".
>>>
>>> Whatever...
>>>
>>> AG
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|