Subject: | Re: [OM] Pictage.com |
---|---|
From: | Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Date: | Wed, 20 Jan 2010 11:44:22 -0500 |
OK, I'll modify my statement. If I make an architectural shot of a steel and glass building I'll try some metallic paper. :-) Chuck Norcutt Ken Norton wrote: >> I also tried a print on metallic paper recently. It wasn't a portrait >> but an indoor architectural shot. I figured it might be OK on metallic >> paper but the look totally turned me off. I won't try it again on any >> subject. > > > I have one picture in particular of the John Hancock building which is > printed on metallic. Simply amazing. The image is nearly 3D and the sun > glinting off the steel and glass look absolutely real on the metallic paper. > At my desk I have a 24x30 of it on normal paper and the picture is really > nice, but side-by-side with the metallic it's the difference between having > a picture of the sky taped to the ceiling of your car vs having the sunroof > open. > > OK, maybe a little hyperbole... > > 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/ |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: [OM] Pictage.com, AS |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [OM] On Warts and all (was "film stuff from the holidays"), C.H.Ling |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [OM] Pictage.com, Ken Norton |
Next by Thread: | Re: [OM] Pictage.com, Sue Pearce |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |