A novelty item

On Mon, 1 May 2017 13:45:22 +0100, Whiskers
wrote:

On 2017-05-01, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 18:40:30 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2017-05-01 01:08:48 +0000, Eric Stevens
said:

On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 17:06:20 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2017-04-30 23:48:42 +0000, Eric Stevens
said:

On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 17:42:10 -0500, gray_wolf
wrote:



On 4/30/2017 5:28 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 16:52:16 -0500, gray_wolf
wrote:

On 4/30/2017 4:07 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
Although breaking the 'rule of thirds' I kinda like
https://www.dropbox.com/s/irz2t9v62a...99-br.jpg?dl=0
The background is a section of a 130 year old cement works
abandoned in 1926.

You have got something close to 'thirds' horizontally )

Only out at the tips of the lower branches. Where they leave the trunk
they are more or less bang on the c entre of the image.

[...]

I processed the image in Photoshop. I haven't done anything with color
except Clarity, vibrance and saturation in ACR. For the rest, I (1)
created an inverted luminance mask so I could concentrate my
adjustments on the tree trunk, (2) used the mask to apply a curves
adjustment layer, (3) used the mask with a brightness/contrast layer
and (4) duplicated layer (3) to in effect gain a more contrasted
effect.

[...]

OK. Here is the original NEF. How do they compare?
https://www.dropbox.com/s/dkkojme958...C5299.NEF?dl=0

[...]

For what it's worth, I like what you did in post processing. It does
improve the image, I think.

Zooming in, I think I detect that the plane of focus is somewhat this
side of the tree trunk, and the concrete structure in the background is
slightly outside the sharpest 'depth of field'. Combined with the very
poor and uneven quality of the concrete and its reaction to a century of
weathering and neglect, that does make the concrete's appearance
difficult to interpret. I'd be tempted to try making it even 'softer'
(don't ask me how, I've never used 'Photoshop').

I'd like to think that if I were in contemplative mood when taking a
photo such as this, I'd consider using a larger aperture and careful
focussing and exposure on the tree trunk to make it stand out more.

Comparing photos on different computers can be tricky, as artifacts
introduced by our own hardware and calibrations and viewing conditions
have an effect - as do variations in individual eyesight.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 2017-04-30 17:07, Eric Stevens wrote:
Although breaking the 'rule of thirds' I kinda like
https://www.dropbox.com/s/irz2t9v62a...99-br.jpg?dl=0
The background is a section of a 130 year old cement works abandoned
in 1926.

Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men.
Nice narrow colour palette.

Symmetry is a useful compositional technique.

Especially like the shadow of the tree below. A mirror of sorts.

Well done!

Sole nit is that in post I might have "repaired" that bright patch to
the left.

--
"If war is God's way of teaching Americans geography, then
recession is His way of teaching everyone a little economics."
..Raj Patel, The Value of Nothing.

On Mon, 1 May 2017 17:49:37 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2017-04-30 17:07, Eric Stevens wrote:
Although breaking the 'rule of thirds' I kinda like
https://www.dropbox.com/s/irz2t9v62a...99-br.jpg?dl=0
The background is a section of a 130 year old cement works abandoned
in 1926.

Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men.
Nice narrow colour palette.

Symmetry is a useful compositional technique.

Especially like the shadow of the tree below. A mirror of sorts.

Well done!

Sole nit is that in post I might have "repaired" that bright patch to
the left.

I have considered that. Perhaps I should get around to it.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 5/1/2017 12:12 AM, Tony Cooper wrote:
On Mon, 01 May 2017 00:54:21 -0400, Tony Cooper
wrote:

On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 21:08:09 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2017-05-01 03:36:10 +0000, Tony Cooper said:

On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 19:41:09 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2017-05-01 01:46:40 +0000, Ron C said:

On 4/30/2017 9:08 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 17:06:20 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2017-04-30 23:48:42 +0000, Eric Stevens said:
On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 17:42:10 -0500, gray_wolf
wrote:
On 4/30/2017 5:28 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 16:52:16 -0500, gray_wolf
wrote:
On 4/30/2017 4:07 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
Although breaking the 'rule of thirds' I kinda like
https://www.dropbox.com/s/irz2t9v62a...99-br.jpg?dl=0
The background is a section of a 130 year old cement works abandoned
in 1926.


I like the view too. Many years with the Hasselblad lead me to an appreciation
of the square format and the 4x5 1.25 ratio. Pano has its uses too but in
general I tend to focus on a small area of fine detail so a centered subject
works fine.

This started off as a 3 x 2 but it just seemed right to crop the
sides. In the original the trunk was much darker and I had to play
around a little to make its detail more visible. I didn't want to
overdo the light through the leaves.

Is this a copy of a real photo. It has the somewhat dated color look.

10th November 2012 at 2:23pm.

I processed the image in Photoshop. I haven't done anything with color
except Clarity, vibrance and saturation in ACR. For the rest, I (1)
created an inverted luminance mask so I could concentrate my
adjustments on the tree trunk, (2) used the mask to apply a curves
adjustment layer, (3) used the mask with a brightness/contrast layer
and (4) duplicated layer (3) to in effect gain a more contrasted
effect.

I have told you all this to show you that I have only been playing
around with light and shade, not colour.

That is all very nice. However, for whatever reason the old concrete,
especially to the right of the tree, seems to have some sort of
pixelation artifact, and for now I couldn't tell if that was due to
sharpening, JPEG compression, DoF issue, or something else.

I can't see anything that I would describe as 'pixelation'. I suspect
you may be seeing the texture of the concrete.

I can understand that Bill was thinking that it had something to do
with your PP. I suspected as much, but since you had labeled the shot
"A novelty item" I didn't go there. I just added to the novelty with my
two odd renditions.

I thought that it would be a novelty to have somebody post a
photograph.

Hey, The Duck posted a photo and attempted to start a thread
about a week ago. Seems I was the only one to jump in with
any photos.

So much for your photo as a novelty at this moment.

Just for the Hell of it, here is another novelty item.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/lygkqdgmacksxk0/_DSF4167-Exposure.jpg

As long as we're doing novelties, here's yesterday's catch:

https://photos.smugmug.com/Rusty-Wre...9-207AA-XL.jpg

A

Checker Marathon!
Great find, with suicide doors, and NBA leg room! Wonderful!
I hope they are planing a restoration.

It is a Marathon, but not a car with suicide doors. Look again. The
handle is at the rear of the rear door.

The Marathon was sold between 1961 and 1982 as a passenger car to
individuals. The Superba was the fleet-sale model sold as a taxi.

The Marathon had a lot of footroom between the front and back seats,
but no jump seats like the Superba.

I meant to add:

The guy operating the tow truck had trouble getting it off the bed.
All the tires were flat and it wouldn't roll off with the bed fully
tilted. After a while of trying to coax it off, he finally got the
rear end off the bed, tilted the bed to less of an angle, drove
forward a few feet, and the car crashed to the ground. The front end
fell about three feet in a cloud of dust and rust. Parts and pieces
flew. I asked him - deadpan - if he was afraid that he'd damaged the
car.

HDR image?