Yeah, I do like my gradient to be where I put them. It's just a matter of putting the gradient where it looks right in the first place, isn't it? Could be fun to have you elaborate on what's obsessive-compulsive about that.
Jostein 2007/6/8, Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > AlunFoto wrote: > > >2007/6/8, mike wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> Well, that would be difficult to surmount with film. Why is it a > problem with > >> digital? It's a Phix once, make an action, event. With very > occasional updating. > >> Actually, I suppose that's not right as the gradient will differ from > shot to shot, > >> depending on where the filter is placed. But you could still create > an action for > >> the colour change and apply it to a selected part of each picture. > > > >You could, if you know precisely how wide the transition zone is. > >Sounds like a PITA... > > Only if you're the obsessive-compulsive type who insists on having the > transition exactly where the original filter put it, as opposed where > it looks as if it needs to be. In parctice it's really pretty easy: > Just put the transition where it *looks* right. Make it a layer and you > can get the transition width and placement right in seconds. really. > > >I replaced my filters before going digital, btw. .-) > > I just replaced my old 2-stop ND-grad before going to GFM. And never > used it there :) > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- http://www.alunfoto.no http://alunfoto.blogspot.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
