I was assuming an overall lightening of the pic. You wouldn't resort to *dodging* would you? That would be "manipulation"! ;-) (Poking fun at the 'purists'.)
Actually I don't know if it would look right or not just lightening the shadows. I'm not good enough at PS to make it look natural. Looks like one of those cut n' paste things when I'm done with it. I've been reading the "New World Camera Raw" some of you suggested. So far it's made me feel real dumb. Either need a more 'entry level' book, or another darkroom in the basement! Demosaicing and Colorimetric Interpretation? Phooey! I just want to make purdy pi'churs. Don (Strollers are for sissys, I 'carried' my kid!) ;-) > -----Original Message----- > From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2005 7:44 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: PAW PESO - Snoozer > > > So now you're a grandfather and you think you know all about babies and > kids in strollers ... HAR! > > Why would the neck and pants leg become more distracting if the face were > brighter? I don't understand your reasoning. > > Shel > > > > [Original Message] > > From: Don Sanderson > > > It's a homeless, motherless, fatherless, cute baby that > > was raised by a stuffed lion. And that blue stroller is > > where he has to live! Quite a statement Shel! > > > > Honestly, very nice shot. A bit more detail in the face > > *would* be nice but I think the neck and pants leg might > > just become too distracting then. My $.02 worth. > > > > Don (aka Gramps) > >
