Personal computing discussed
Moderators: renee, Dposcorp, SpotTheCat
flip-mode wrote:So I took another run at the bridge picture from earlier and used some of the masking techniques... new version posted after the quote
PenGun wrote:flip-mode wrote:So I took another run at the bridge picture from earlier and used some of the masking techniques... new version posted after the quote
And I bet that is much closer to what you saw when you took the picture.
flip-mode wrote:PenGun wrote:flip-mode wrote:So I took another run at the bridge picture from earlier and used some of the masking techniques... new version posted after the quote
And I bet that is much closer to what you saw when you took the picture.
I am going to have to do better at consciously noting my actual perceptions versus what the image looks like, but I can say that the sky was not that blue. I find that I am able to pull way more blue out of the sky than was actually seen with my own eye. But it's really hard to say, since in real life my eye is one moment focused under the bridge and adjusted to suit, and the next minute the ground, and the next minute the sky, but never seeing it all together simultaneously as the camera does. Were that the case, I imagine my eye might work more like the camera.
I am so, so glad for this camera... I'll take pictures of my kids that didn't feel worth taking with sh:tty cameras, and so I'll have those to return to for the the rest of my life. It will be amazing to look at them a decade or two from now.
PenGun wrote:Nice pic of your son in the tree. That is a good one.
flip-mode wrote:PenGun wrote:Nice pic of your son in the tree. That is a good one.
Thanks, man. I was eager to share that one with the TR group. It does need some color tweaking. His face is green!
ludi wrote:I usually pick the shot's primary subject and then white-balance for it, unless it completely distorts the background to something so unnatural that it detracts from the subject. For example, last Christmas I took several pictures of my family in a room illuminated mainly by CFLs, which results in a lot of green spectral lines and corresponding "zombie skin" effects. After white-balancing (and warming a bit) to correct the skin tone, some of the background objects went "off" slightly, and I couldn't repair one without distorting the other. So, I erred for skin tone, because that's the first thing that will ruin a picture.
ludi wrote:I usually pick the shot's primary subject and then white-balance for it, unless it completely distorts the background to something so unnatural that it detracts from the subject. For example, last Christmas I took several pictures of my family in a room illuminated mainly by CFLs, which results in a lot of green spectral lines and corresponding "zombie skin" effects. After white-balancing (and warming a bit) to correct the skin tone, some of the background objects went "off" slightly, and I couldn't repair one without distorting the other. So, I erred for skin tone, because that's the first thing that will ruin a picture.
PenGun wrote:I have the Lightroom trial but the Fuji software seems more complete.
TheEmrys wrote:PenGun wrote:I have the Lightroom trial but the Fuji software seems more complete.
I would be shocked if this were true. I'd play around in LR a bit more.
flip-mode wrote:Tharp, I don't know why your image isn't showing up, but I looked through the whole set of photos on Flickr and they're all great shots, well composed. Good work, strong work.
TheEmrys wrote:Gorgeous shots. TR's forum software automatically crops images. Does Flikr give you a thumbnail option less than 900 pixels wide?I'm thrilled with my new Sony 70-400G.
RMNP June 1 (3 of 5).jpg
RMNP June 1 (2 of 5).jpg
Edit : Not digging the auto cropping that happened. Any help would be appreciated.