|
|
Dan Wilson
{K:21104} 6/17/2008
|
My Gosh, I can't believe this slipped past me. Perfect shot in everyway, simply stunning my friend, adding to my favourites
|
|
|
|
Joggie van Staden
{K:41700} 6/14/2008
|
Hi Eb
A superb "visualisation" and very nicely realised! On first impressions I do prefer the second version - just have that slightly smoother appearance. On second thought though, I always try to put myself behind the camera when looking at an image, trying to imagine the feeling and atmosphere - in a sense to relive that the photographer experienced - I call it involved viewing.Whith that perspective in mind, the very slight noise in the first version do not bother me at all, rather it makes it more truthfull. I think we all are so caught up in the strive for "perfection" (ie the Nikon versus Canon wars!) that we often perfect our images beyond realism! Case in point - I yet have to meet one of those silky-skinned models we see on this site as well as in glossy magazines - its just unreal and artificial and I regard it as part of the Barby Doll syndrome. During bad light situations, the light is - well, bad!! Even when one look at the subject, your eyes (super-instruments of perception, linked with a mega super computer for intepreation) are struggling to cope. That slight noisiness in the image brings me back to the experience, the atmosphere and standing next to you, smelling the lupins and breathing the crsipy air.
|
|
|
|
Eb Mueller
{K:24960} 6/12/2008
|
Peter, the image was exposed for the highlights, thus leaving the problem of extracting information from the shadows. The D300 at 14bit still gives you a lot of information in the shadow area. The first method I used was the "fill light" tool plus tonal adjustments in Adobe Lightroom. I may have over-reached the capability of this tool. Another, though similar, is the "shadow/highlight" in Photoshop. It can be fine tuned and would likely do better. However, for the second sample, I used the "tonemapping" plug-in from Photomatix. This is intended for remapping HDR from multiple images but also works well on a single image. It is a powerful tool but I thought it not necessary. On the first sample, I could see some artifacts, but barely. That is why I reason that your monitor must be quite bright for them to be obvious enough to bother you!
Eb
|
|
|
|
Shirley D. Cross-Taylor
{K:174133} 6/12/2008
|
WOW, Eb! This is exquisite, and goes straight to my Favorites!
|
|
|
|
Peter De Rycke
{K:41212} 6/12/2008
|
That makes for a SOLID difference Eb, no more artefacts to see on the pink flowers !!
Now if you could reveal the 2 methods, i could understand the difference perhaps it makes on my monitor ?
Peter
|
|
|
|
|
Eb Mueller
{K:24960} 6/12/2008
|
Peter, I reprocessed the image using a different technique for dealing with the dynamic range. It may look better on your monitor. Certainly, there are less colour artifacts.
Eb
|
Alternate Method |
|
|
|
Dave Stacey
{K:150877} 6/12/2008
|
Beautiful colour and detail, Eb, and that background and perspective, really makes this shot that much different!
Dave.
|
|
|
|
|
Eb Mueller
{K:24960} 6/12/2008
|
Thanks for your comment, Peter! Neatimage won't do a thing for that without destroying detail! If you can see noise on the flowers, consider that your monitor might be too bright. I can not see that there is any problem on my calibrated monitor. Of course, the image is heavily processed since this dynamic range is impossible without doing so. As far as saturation goes, it is always added to my images. A necessity because the camera sensor does not see the way I do. The image is previsualized and then it is up to me to reveal what I "see." I would be pleased to if you told me what your philosophy is on creating images?
Eb
|
|
|
|
|
Peter De Rycke
{K:41212} 6/11/2008
|
So i suppose you deliberately added saturation ?
The colour-effect is good, but the spotty aspect of the flowers is ruining it for me, you might consider using Neatimage ?
Peter
|
|
|
|
|
jacques brisebois
{K:73883} 6/11/2008
|
very nice colors, real nice work Eb.
|
|
|
|
M jalili
{K:69009} 6/11/2008
|
A very beautiful work .7/7 ...........
|
|
|
|
|
Vicki Hagan
{K:195} 6/11/2008
|
This photo is awesome! The contrasting colors are eye-catching, to say the least. Lovely..good job!
|
|
|
|
Malules Fernandez
{K:54810} 6/11/2008
|
Very good work, Eb. Wonderful
hugs,
Malules
|
|
|
|
Gustavo Scheverin
{K:164501} 6/11/2008
|
Extraordinario trabajo Eb, de tus mejores fotos. 7/7
Felicitaciones!
|
|
0 
