|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 7/23/2008
|
It's not really skepticism, Harry, it's naming things with their real names, using the already available definitions, and also applying the physics of optics which doesn't do any extra favors to us all. (Unfortunately!;-)) Considering the already available definitions, if we start naming things at free will, then we get some kind of Babel-like situation, where we talk with each other and don't really understand each other, but rather what we carry in our own mind.
So, to name it SLIDE techinque is indeed more appropriate. But still we don't escape the laws of physics even if we believe anything else. And one very fundamental low is that the additional amount of photons that will hit some already well exposed part of the film/CCD/whatever *will* re-react with the elementary light detectors there, burning thus the available details to nirvana. This is not believing, this is simply calculating. The only way to control/inhibit this photo-chemical (in case of film) or photo-electric reaction (in case of CCD) is to somehow screen the already well exposed parts from the additional impacting photons.
So, how could such a controlled screening take place? I think now of partially covering the lens, but with what? And how to remember where the exposure has already taken its maximum value? Your method has much potential in front of it, which has to be carefully examined.
You see, I also look for ways to get ultra-high dynamics, but this is not a matter of "my own taste". The photons and the electromagnetic waves do not care what I find find good or bad. This is at the end the only reason why our cameras will still work exactly the same way, even if we happen to wake up in some morning and believe in miracles and the like.
Tot ziens again!
Nick
P.S.: Don't think, just try... If we, as human beings, stayed on that level, we would be still running with clubs through the forests, believing that our "reasons" for some phenomenon are just because we tried and found out once again that some god or demon makes it work. Sorry, I am not very enthusiastic about that approach. I think further...
|
|
|
|
Wolf Zorrito
{K:78768} 7/22/2008
|
I accept your skeptism Nick.
It is not live real HDR. A cannot bcse back in 1985 we did not know HDR or it would arrive.
My goal is to get the maximum out of a slide, get is full dynamics on digital. And also a kind of stacking of images. I understand your skeptism but pse give it a try. It IS HDR
For me it just gives better images of slides.
Maybe I should call it SLIDE technique:
Stacking images
Lower noise
Improvement of
Dynamic range.
Enhancement.
So now it is the patented SLiDE(C) technique !
Thanks
PS, dont think, just try. It works.
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 7/22/2008
|
A very very good coloring here, Harry, but above that the good use of perpective in its combination with a good composition. Most of the time it gets really had to compose some particular part of such a scene - I guess it was many boats side by side. But still you got a rather photogenic partail view with a small (unavoidable) exception on the bottom. (Water and that part of the other boat.)
About HDR... if I understand you right, you took 5 exposures on the same frame of slide. Well, this is definitely not exactly HDR. It's simply multiexposure - something like making an image out of several identical layers, but unforthunately the behavior of film when you "overlay" with the next shot is completely different than when you do that digitally. The brighter light of some specific region when exposing again a bit more will simply burn even more intense, and thus overburn the regions where some more details were available previously. You can't adjust the weight and local intensity of the different regions on each single exposure this way, and thus you only get some kind of HDR but not really HDR.
Except of course if you cover some parts of the lens on each shot, and then cover the previously uncovered parts and reveal the covered parts for the next shots of the multiexposure. This would be like making the image out of puzzle pieces which could also be named HDR, though usually not used. Because then it has to be some cover pieces with a transpareny that grows from 0 to 1 near the boundaries of the cover, or else the "stiching" edges of the puzzle pieces will exhibit abrupt lighting changes.
Cheers!
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Wolf Zorrito
{K:78768} 7/22/2008
|
Some more stuff from home ;-)
http://www.usefilm.com/Image.asp?ID=1450674
|
|
|
|
|
Wolf Zorrito
{K:78768} 7/22/2008
|
I was 24 when I was in Bangkok. Very clean well dressed people witha smile.
Harry
|
|
|
|
theerapong bhothirungsi
{K:647} 7/22/2008
|
I'm missing home now... this pic was taken when I was very child, but you still can find this kind of boat in any important canal in Bangkok, I think. :)
|
|
|
|
Julie Salles
{K:22654} 7/21/2008
|
jusallesfeli@hotmail.com
Een kus op je andere wang :)
Julie.
|
|
|
|
|
Wolf Zorrito
{K:78768} 7/21/2008
|
Its a miracle, how do you do it. Special rejuvinating cream ? Nah, must be your genes !! :-) May I say that at your age women are most beautiful, full mature etc . You are at your golden age mi amor.
OMG now you are in the stress to get children and a husband and settle before it is too late !!!
( ooops sorry when I really hurt you, not my intention )
Ahhh, Julie, you are the best from Brazil !
Een kus op je andere wang.
Harry
|
|
|
|
|
Julie Salles
{K:22654} 7/21/2008
|
hahahaha, I wish I was born in 1983...actually no I don't ;)
Een zoen op je wang, right back at you ;)
|
|
|
|
|
Wolf Zorrito
{K:78768} 7/21/2008
|
Excursion boats, taxis AND the boat 007 used in one of his films I like most !
|
|
|
|
|
Wolf Zorrito
{K:78768} 7/21/2008
|
NO NO this cannot be !!! You were BORN in 1983 ........... !!
Een zoen op je wang, Harry (jejeje holandees jejeje )
|
|
|
|
|
Julie Salles
{K:22654} 7/21/2008
|
Let me think, where was I in 1983...hmmmm oh wow I was living in Recife which is in Pernambuco and I was in 3rd grade in school :)
Excellent shot my dear friend. I love the colors and the details around it!
Beijinhos,
Julie.
|
|
|
|
Stan Hill
{K:35352} 7/21/2008
|
Looks like on serious motor for the boat. I like the portrait by the motor and the bright colors. Are these taxis or excursion boats? Nice shot Harry!
Be well, Stan
|
|
0 
