I've had another look it. Went back to Lightroom, and the history there told me I was wrong. I had altered the exposure about a half step. So that explains most of it.
What I still don't understand, is that it lookes a bit different online. Even lighter. Tim Typo Mostly Harmless ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Øsleby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2007 3:27 AM Subject: Re: One more revisited It is not a loaded question. It is two loaded questions ;-) Blown out? I think they must have changed during preps for web. It looked better inside Elements. Online it looks a bit lighter. How do I check the profile in the online version? I just tried lokking at "File Info" in Elements and found nothing. When I said light USM I ment 85/1/4. That's what Scott Kelby (the author of the book I'm using) calls a "All-Purpose Sharpening", "Subtile enough that you can apply it twice if your photo doesn't seem sharp enough". When you say oversharpened, do you mean heavily or a tad too much? Are you speaking genereally, or in any specific parts of the photo? I do agree that the angle is less than perfect. But it was kind of hard working around the birds, without a boat ;-) Christian. I really appreciate this feedback. I may be an ass, but I do need some whiping ;-) Tim Typo Mostly Harmless ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2007 2:08 AM Subject: Re: One more revisited Tim Øsleby wrote: > Origenal http://www.photosight.org/photo.php?photoid=58978&ref=author > The main problem here is lack of seperation between birds and rocks. > > The improved version: > http://www.photosight.org/photo.php?photoid=60124&ref=author > > What do you think? Worth the effort? Hmmmmm, that's a loaded question.... :-) First: The original is better. The second looks blown out and, for whatever reason, oversharpened (you said "light USM" and I'll take your word for it. Just telling you how it looks to me). Ok, so how would I improve it? This one had a lot of potential from the beginning but you missed THE opportunity, in my opinion. I love the group of oystercatchers. It reminds me of a group of black skimmers I shot in Cape May. Both are black birds with orange bills. My main complaint is that you shot them from behind. I would have worked around to the left to get them more in profile. The shot would have been similar. A group of birds with some (in the front) in sharp focus, and the remaining flock OOF. Hard to work a skittish flock of birds? Of course, but possible by keeping a low profile and crawling on your belly. Yes, I know this isn't meant to be a "typical" bird picture. But, the birds in better profile and focus, yet still with the swirling snow and rocky beachscape, would have been THE killer shot. -- Christian http://photography.skofteland.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.1/822 - Release Date: 28.05.2007 11:40 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.1/822 - Release Date: 28.05.2007 11:40 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
