Thanks all for the wonderful comments!!! I hope that's all I need to get back
on the horse and process a bunch more. :-)
On 1/30/2018 11:49 PM, Philippe wrote:
Fan-Tas-Tic!
People, panos, butterflies, etc.
Love them all Philippe
On 1/31/2018 3:18 AM, Wayne Harridge wrote:
Impressive collection Moose !
On 1/31/2018 7:09 AM, Jim Nichols wrote:
Beautiful color, perfect focus on all the details. Great work, Moose!
On 1/31/2018 7:16 AM, Paul Braun wrote:
Lovely, interesting assortment of photos, Moose. And the panos are spectacular.
I've switched from PS to Hugin for wide panos. MikeG turned me on to the Panini Projection, which gives much more
realistic looking sides.
On 1/31/2018 8:58 PM, Nathan Wajsman wrote:
Beautiful colors and landscapes. But the one that really made me smile is the
one of the boys with a smartphone.
I love that one, too. I could say it's all luck, but decisions about where to be and when, patience, attention and some
modicum of skill in capture and post are other major factors. Oh yeah, gear too, as that one, and many in this gallery,
don't happen without the looong lens. Those boys were on an upper level, across the plaza where the dancing was
happening, about 20m away from me.
On 2/1/2018 4:22 AM, ChrisB wrote:
So many, indeed, Moose; so many beautiful colours, people, ‘scapes and
creatures.
Thanks for going to all that trouble :-)
My pleasure, just for you! :-)
On 1/31/2018 12:51 PM, Frank wrote:
Very nice, thanks!
Nice sharpening, any tips to share?
Sure, how long do you have??
Of course, opinions vary:
On 11/20/2017 11:41 AM, Bob Whitmire wrote:
> Are you gaining visual acuity as you age? The images are painfully sharp
to me. I would not go so far as to say
over-sharpened, because that's not what they look like, but I have to be
careful not to cut my eyes looking at them.
;-) That said, there's a bunch of them "I" would soften, maybe add just a
hint of glow, but that's just me.
I responded 'Details accentuated beyond your taste without heavy handed,
obvious sharpening?', to which he agreed.
And there lies the line, clear fine detail without "heavy handed, obvious sharpening" Getting there in an image
downsized for the web is a multi-step process.* I can speak fairly briefly to the final step of resharpening for detail
lost in the downsampling process. (ALL, YES, ALL digital sampling loses the edge contrast that makes detail visible.)
The late Bruce Fraser wrote the wonderful bible on all this for CS2. There are still techniques in that book that I
refer to. Unfortunately, he died before deconvolution as means of reconstruction of visually lost detail came in general
purpose form.
I almost always use some "sharpening" with FocusMagic after downsampling for the web. Most often that is masked, with
varied layer opacities, to affect different parts of the image differently. For example, slightly more detailed eyes,
teeth and lips give the impression of sharpness without making the rest of a face look over-sharpened.
Grateful Moose
* I was just fighting the results of a particular lens and process that looks great - until I downsample it . . . I'm
losing, but will go back again.
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|