It's result not having the original, Joel, but you produced blurring when you
did that.
I find Tina's result OK, although it is indistinct and a little noisy. It has
more of an painterly feel as it is.
It's difficult to work out if all the noise was in the original negative, or
some is as a result of the scanning process.
Chris
On 25 Feb 2013, at 00:58, DZDub <jdubikins@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I really love this one. It's tough! I wanted the detail in the darker
> areas, but I wanted little less grain/noise, and I had some qualms about
> the composition itself. You don't slavishly stick to compositional
> "rules," but I don't see what might be gained in not observing them here.
> So -- forgive me -- but I experimented with a 1:1 crop:
>
> http://zone-10.com/tope2/main.php?g2_itemId=2873
>
> I'm not wedded to it, but I thought it might be good to see if you want to
> rule it out.
>
> Before cropping, I used the H/S tool to balance values a bit and used
> Noiseware at light settings. I thought that worked well enough. I moved
> the black point to where the pixels began to mount up, which cleans up the
> black a little but seems to lose detail. (It doesn't really lose detail,
> because there are no pixels there, but it darkens it. Still I think that's
> what must be.
>
> I didn't like some blotchiness around her arm above the elbow. Using
> layers I blended in some gaussian blur to the background as well as to the
> highlights outdoors. I don't think it's quite "there" yet, but that's what
> I did.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|